linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv6 00/16] x86: Enable Linear Address Space Separation support

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: <1aa5fb31-ce23-4c9f-ba1b-d5dc93402209@citrix.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2025 23:04:53 +0100
From: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com>
To: dave.hansen@...el.com
Cc: acme@...hat.com, aik@....com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
 alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com, ardb@...nel.org, ast@...nel.org,
 bp@...en8.de, brijesh.singh@....com, changbin.du@...wei.com,
 christophe.leroy@...roup.eu, corbet@....net, daniel.sneddon@...ux.intel.com,
 dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, ebiggers@...gle.com, geert+renesas@...der.be,
 houtao1@...wei.com, hpa@...or.com, jgg@...pe.ca, jgross@...e.com,
 jpoimboe@...nel.org, kai.huang@...el.com, kees@...nel.org,
 kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com, leitao@...ian.org,
 linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-efi@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, linux@...musvillemoes.dk,
 luto@...nel.org, mcgrof@...nel.org, mhiramat@...nel.org,
 michael.roth@....com, mingo@...nel.org, mingo@...hat.com,
 namhyung@...nel.org, paulmck@...nel.org, pawan.kumar.gupta@...ux.intel.com,
 peterz@...radead.org, rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com, rppt@...nel.org,
 sandipan.das@....com, shijie@...amperecomputing.com, sohil.mehta@...el.com,
 tglx@...utronix.de, tj@...nel.org, tony.luck@...el.com,
 vegard.nossum@...cle.com, x86@...nel.org, xin3.li@...el.com,
 xiongwei.song@...driver.com, ytcoode@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCHv6 00/16] x86: Enable Linear Address Space Separation
 support

> Most of the cover letter here reads like an Intel whitepaper. That's not
> the worst thing in the world, but I think it glosses over one very
> important point:
>
> 	Had it been available, LASS alone would have mitigated Meltdown.
>
> Could we say this up front in a prominent place, please?

I'm going to nitpick. :)

Yes, LASS would have made Meltdown a far less major problem than it was,
but I don't think that phrasing is fair.  As I recall, LASS was
literally invented as a "what would have been useful?" exercise in the
wake of Meltdown.

However, a less well known/researched area of Meltdown, which would not
be addressed by LASS, is the ability to pend stores to read-only memory
and proceed with the expectation that they'll success.

Other things which would have helped would have been PKS (and this *was*
asked for ahead of Skylake launching...)

The other important thing about LASS is that it does cut off a whole
class of sidechannels.  This halts definitely-rogue speculation, but is
useful for non-speculative security too.

~Andrew