linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 5/7] x86/fpu: Initialize guest fpstate and FPU pseudo container from guest defaults

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: <aBmDJVaKdSvoHozQ@intel.com>
Date: Tue, 6 May 2025 11:33:57 +0800
From: Chao Gao <chao.gao@...el.com>
To: "Chang S. Bae" <chang.seok.bae@...el.com>
CC: "Edgecombe, Rick P" <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>, "Hansen, Dave"
	<dave.hansen@...el.com>, "seanjc@...gle.com" <seanjc@...gle.com>,
	"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org"
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>, "pbonzini@...hat.com"
	<pbonzini@...hat.com>, "Yang, Weijiang" <weijiang.yang@...el.com>, "Li, Xin3"
	<xin3.li@...el.com>, "ebiggers@...gle.com" <ebiggers@...gle.com>,
	"bp@...en8.de" <bp@...en8.de>, "dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com"
	<dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, "peterz@...radead.org" <peterz@...radead.org>,
	"john.allen@....com" <john.allen@....com>, "mingo@...hat.com"
	<mingo@...hat.com>, "hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>, "Spassov, Stanislav"
	<stanspas@...zon.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 5/7] x86/fpu: Initialize guest fpstate and FPU pseudo
 container from guest defaults

On Thu, May 01, 2025 at 07:24:09AM -0700, Chang S. Bae wrote:
>On 4/30/2025 11:29 AM, Edgecombe, Rick P wrote:
>> 
>> So let's drop the code but not the idea. Chang what do you think of that?
>Sure, that makes sense. Thanks for bringing up this case.

Yea, I agree with dropping vcpu_fpu_config.user_* for now.

>
>Staring at the struct guest_fpu fields, some of them appear to match with
>fields in fpstate. In any case, I agree it would be helpful to consider a
>follow-up series after this.