linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86/its: use Sapphire Rapids+ feature to opt out

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: <D0A1D388-7DF1-4C70-BA58-DF1625077852@nutanix.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2025 16:26:36 +0000
From: Jon Kohler <jon@...anix.com>
To: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
CC: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner
	<tglx@...utronix.de>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Peter Zijlstra
	<peterz@...radead.org>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...nel.org>,
        Pawan Gupta
	<pawan.kumar.gupta@...ux.intel.com>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, Ingo
 Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Brian
 Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>,
        Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@...gle.com>,
        "Ahmed S.
 Darwish" <darwi@...utronix.de>,
        Alexandre Chartre
	<alexandre.chartre@...cle.com>,
        "linux-doc@...r.kernel.org"
	<linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org"
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/its: use Sapphire Rapids+ feature to opt out



> On Oct 20, 2025, at 12:21 PM, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com> wrote:
> 
> !-------------------------------------------------------------------|
>  CAUTION: External Email
> 
> |-------------------------------------------------------------------!
> 
> On 10/20/25 09:05, Jon Kohler wrote:
>> Was running into some testing issues with my qemu change internally,
>> but I’ll get that out this week once I clear them.
> 
> BTW, if there are folks out there that are working on things like QEMU
> and want more formal or regular notification from vendors that a FOO_NO
> bit has been added, that can probably be arranged.

That’d be nice! I’d be game for that.

> The real issue here is that nobody cared enough to get QEMU to
> comprehend ITS_NO right after the embargo was lifted, right?

As a general statement, yes, but I’m not privy to any conversations that
may have happened on non-googleable list(s), so it may have been
discussed but never materialized … or maybe it was never discussed
at all.

Net-net though, you’re right, the drama is that the guests/distros have
gotten hit with this, and on the virtualization platform side, we’ve
effectively had zero time to prepare for this.