linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -v2] x86/retpoline: Ensure default return thunk isn't used at runtime

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2024 00:25:42 +0200
From: Klara Modin <klarasmodin@...il.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...nel.org>, "Kaplan, David"
 <David.Kaplan@....com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
 "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
 "linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org" <linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org>,
 "Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@...radead.org>,
 "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>, David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v2] x86/retpoline: Ensure default return thunk isn't used
 at runtime

On 2024-04-03 22:41, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 03, 2024 at 10:26:19PM +0200, Klara Modin wrote:
>> Probably, I don't have much knowledge about this stuff. The machine can at
>> least be useful for testing still :)
> 
> I wouldn't use it if I were you as it wouldn't even justify the
> electricity wasted. No one cares about 32-bit x86 kernels anymore and we
> barely keep them alive.
> 
> It'll be a lot more helpful if you'd test 64-bit kernels on 64-bit hw.
> 
> :-)
> 
> Thx.
> 
All the more reason to continue then, even if only for nostalgia ;)

Jokes aside, I do run -next kernels regularly for my daily drivers 
(which are x86_64), but it's honestly not very often I notice bugs there 
that affect me. They have all been pretty minor or very obvious and 
would probably have been caught regardless, but I'll of course still 
report them.