linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86/fpu: Delay instruction pointer fixup until after after warning

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <2a57590b-879d-4920-a20f-beb5cf63d432@intel.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2025 13:59:45 -0700
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To: Chao Gao <chao.gao@...el.com>, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
 bp@...en8.de, mingo@...nel.org, "Chang S. Bae" <chang.seok.bae@...el.com>,
 Eric Biggers <ebiggers@...gle.com>, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
 stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/fpu: Delay instruction pointer fixup until after
 after warning

On 6/18/25 19:37, Chao Gao wrote:
> instead of delaying the RIP fixup,
> 
>> 	fpu_reset_from_exception_fixup();
>> 	return true;
> can we do
> 
> 	return ex_handler_default(fixup, regs);
> 
> here? Similar to what other handlers ex_handler_{fault, sgx, uaccess, ...} are
> doing.

Yep, good idea. I don't see any reason that this should have been
special in the first place.