linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v1 10/15] KVM: VMX: Use WRMSRNS or its immediate form when available

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: <c4fcb208-ee5d-4781-85ce-3b75e651d047@zytor.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2025 10:06:01 -0700
From: Xin Li <xin@...or.com>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
        Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-hyperv@...r.kernel.org, virtualization@...ts.linux.dev,
        linux-edac@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org, linux-ide@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, bpf@...r.kernel.org, llvm@...ts.linux.dev,
        tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, bp@...en8.de,
        dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, x86@...nel.org, jgross@...e.com,
        andrew.cooper3@...rix.com, peterz@...radead.org, acme@...nel.org,
        namhyung@...nel.org, mark.rutland@....com,
        alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com, jolsa@...nel.org,
        irogers@...gle.com, adrian.hunter@...el.com, kan.liang@...ux.intel.com,
        wei.liu@...nel.org, ajay.kaher@...adcom.com,
        bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com, tony.luck@...el.com,
        pbonzini@...hat.com, vkuznets@...hat.com, luto@...nel.org,
        boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com, kys@...rosoft.com, haiyangz@...rosoft.com,
        decui@...rosoft.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 10/15] KVM: VMX: Use WRMSRNS or its immediate form
 when available

On 4/14/2025 11:56 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> arlier in the pipeline, right?
> Yes, but then it would be redundant with the virtualization support.
> 

So better to drop this patch then.