linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86/cpufeatures: Correct LKGS feature flag description

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: <b632fc82-bef4-456b-ba62-939bda5a4361@zytor.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2025 23:34:00 +0800
From: Xin Li <xin@...or.com>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...nel.org>,
        Xin Li <xin3.li@...el.com>
Cc: X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Borislav Petkov (AMD)" <bp@...en8.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/cpufeatures: Correct LKGS feature flag description

On 10/15/2025 11:18 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On October 15, 2025 8:08:17 AM PDT, Xin Li <xin@...or.com> wrote:
>> On 10/15/2025 6:35 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>>> From: "Borislav Petkov (AMD)" <bp@...en8.de>
>>>
>>> Quotation marks in cpufeatures.h comments are special and when the
>>> comment begins with a quoted string, that string lands in /proc/cpuinfo,
>>> turning it into a user-visible one.
>>>
>>> The LKGS comment doesn't begin with a quoted string but just in case
>>> drop the quoted "kernel" in there to avoid confusion. And while at it,
>>> simply change the description into what the LKGS instruction does for
>>> more clarity.
>>>
>>> No functional changes.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov (AMD) <bp@...en8.de>
>>> ---
>>>    arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h       | 2 +-
>>>    tools/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h | 2 +-
>>>    2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h
>>> index 80b68f4726e7..4fb5e12dbdbf 100644
>>> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h
>>> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h
>>> @@ -320,7 +320,7 @@
>>>    #define X86_FEATURE_FSRS		(12*32+11) /* Fast short REP STOSB */
>>>    #define X86_FEATURE_FSRC		(12*32+12) /* Fast short REP {CMPSB,SCASB} */
>>>    #define X86_FEATURE_FRED		(12*32+17) /* "fred" Flexible Return and Event Delivery */
>>> -#define X86_FEATURE_LKGS		(12*32+18) /* Load "kernel" (userspace) GS */
>>> +#define X86_FEATURE_LKGS		(12*32+18) /* MSR_KERNEL_GS_BASE = GS.base */
>>
>> Yes, the assignment is more clearer to us programmers.
>>
>> I'm just not sure if "correct" in the shortlog is accurate; it sounds the
>> existing one is wrong.  Otherwise,
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Xin Li (Intel) <xin@...or.com>
>>
> 
> That "assignment" is rather wrong, though; it implies that the two are identical, which they are not; nor does it imply the relationship is fixed (that is provided by FRED, not LKGS). Perhaps just call it "Load user space GS".

I see your point, is the following assignment better?

     MSR_KERNEL_GS_BASE = gs_sel->base