linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] x86/fpu: Avoid writing LBR bit to IA32

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]

Message-ID: <66b80624.050a0220.39b486.4736@mx.google.com>
Date: Sat, 10 Aug 2024 17:30:27 -0700
From: Mitchell Levy <levymitchell0@...il.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: Mitchell Levy via B4 Relay <devnull+levymitchell0.gmail.com@...nel.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, x86@...nel.org,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Kan Liang <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>,
	"Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@...radead.org>,
	stable@...r.kernel.org, Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] x86/fpu: Avoid writing LBR bit to IA32_XSS unless
 supported

On Sun, Aug 11, 2024 at 01:08:18AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 09 2024 at 13:53, Mitchell Levy via wrote:
> > From: Mitchell Levy <levymitchell0@...il.com>
> 
> ...
> 
> > Signed-off-by: Mitchell Levy <levymitchell0@...il.com>
> > ---
> > Changes in v2:
> > - Corrected Fixes tag (thanks tglx)
> > - Properly check for XSAVES support of LBR (thanks tglx)
> 
> IOW. I provided you the proper fix and now you are reposting it and
> claiming authorship for it?
Apologies, I did not consider authorship implications when resubmitting,
as I haven't encountered the situation where a patch is essentially
rewritten during the review process before. I will be much more mindful
of issues of authorship in future, and I appreciate you pointing this
out to me.

> May I ask you to read Documentation/process/ ?
Yes, I have now more thoroughly covered these docs. On second look, it
appears there's no Signed-off-by in your reply to my v1. I can send the
patch with you properly listed as the author and the proper
Signed-off-by lines if I have your permission to add your signoff.
Alternatively, feel free to reuse part/all of my commit message if you'd
rather submit the patch directly; it's quite understandable if you feel
unenthusiastic about me being involved with code you've authored.

> Thanks,
> 
>         tglx