linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 00/11] support SCTLR2

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: <86qzxr6z5o.wl-maz@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2025 13:37:23 +0100
From: Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
To: Yeoreum Yun <yeoreum.yun@....com>
Cc: catalin.marinas@....com,
	will@...nel.org,
	broonie@...nel.org,
	oliver.upton@...ux.dev,
	anshuman.khandual@....com,
	robh@...nel.org,
	james.morse@....com,
	mark.rutland@....com,
	joey.gouly@....com,
	ry111@...111.site,
	Dave.Martin@....com,
	ahmed.genidi@....com,
	kevin.brodsky@....com,
	scott@...amperecomputing.com,
	mbenes@...e.cz,
	james.clark@...aro.org,
	frederic@...nel.org,
	rafael@...nel.org,
	pavel@...nel.org,
	ryan.roberts@....com,
	suzuki.poulose@....com,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
	kvmarm@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/11] support SCTLR2_ELx

On Mon, 04 Aug 2025 13:17:13 +0100,
Yeoreum Yun <yeoreum.yun@....com> wrote:
> 
> This series introduces initial support for the SCTLR2_ELx registers in Linux.
> The feature is optional starting from ARMv8.8/ARMv9.3,
> and becomes mandatory from ARMv8.9/ARMv9.4.
> 
> Currently, Linux has no strict need to modify SCTLR2_ELx—
> at least assuming that firmware initializes
> these registers to reasonable defaults.
> 
> However, several upcoming architectural features will require configuring
> control bits in these registers.
> Notable examples include FEAT_PAuth_LR and FEAT_CPA2.
> 
> This series is based on v6.16 and probably KVM-safe but
> Not tested yet:
>   - nVHE boot.

"Probably" and "Not tested yet" are not exactly what we are looking
for when looking at a series that adds support for a new architectural
feature.

Also, a lot of the KVM patches are redundant now that we do have
FEAT_SCTLR2 support in KVM (see what has been merged for 6.17). You
probably want to rebase on -rc1 once it is released, which should cut
the series by half.

Thanks,

	M.

-- 
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.