linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 05/12] x86/mm: add INVLPGB support code

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: <0de32bbc-66e9-4875-af87-7a2fa2e03e39@intel.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2025 08:50:27 -0800
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>
Cc: x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-team@...a.com,
 dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, luto@...nel.org, peterz@...radead.org,
 tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com,
 akpm@...ux-foundation.org, nadav.amit@...il.com, zhengqi.arch@...edance.com,
 linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/12] x86/mm: add INVLPGB support code

On 1/2/25 04:42, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>> +#define INVLPGB_VA			BIT(0)
>> +#define INVLPGB_PCID			BIT(1)
>> +#define INVLPGB_ASID			BIT(2)
>> +#define INVLPGB_INCLUDE_GLOBAL		BIT(3)
>> +#define INVLPGB_FINAL_ONLY		BIT(4)
>> +#define INVLPGB_INCLUDE_NESTED		BIT(5)
> Please add only the defines which are actually being used. Ditto for the
> functions.

There's some precedent for defining them all up front, like we did for
invpcid_flush_*().

For INVPCID, there are four variants and two of them got used up front.
But I get that it's a balancing act between having untested code that
might bitrot and introducing helpers at a time when someone (Rik) is
very likely to get all the variants coded up correctly.

Rik, how many of these end up being used by the end of the series?