Re: [PATCH v18 02/25] x86/cet/shstk: Add Kconfig option for user-mode control-flow protection

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

To: Borislav Petkov <bp@xxxxxxxxx>, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v18 02/25] x86/cet/shstk: Add Kconfig option for user-mode control-flow protection
From: "Yu, Yu-cheng" <yu-cheng.yu@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2021 13:13:26 -0800
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, x86@xxxxxxxxxx, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-doc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-mm@xxxxxxxxx, linux-arch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-api@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@xxxxxxxxxx>, Balbir Singh <bsingharora@xxxxxxxxx>, Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@xxxxxxxxx>, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Eugene Syromiatnikov <esyr@xxxxxxxxxx>, Florian Weimer <fweimer@xxxxxxxxxx>, "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@xxxxxxxxx>, Jann Horn <jannh@xxxxxxxxxx>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@xxxxxxx>, Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@xxxxxxxxxx>, Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@xxxxxxxxx>, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@xxxxxxxxxx>, Pavel Machek <pavel@xxxxxx>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Ravi V. Shankar" <ravi.v.shankar@xxxxxxxxx>, Vedvyas Shanbhogue <vedvyas.shanbhogue@xxxxxxxxx>, Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@xxxxxxx>, Weijiang Yang <weijiang.yang@xxxxxxxxx>, Pengfei Xu <pengfei.xu@xxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <20210129204601.GG27841@zn.tnic>
References: <40a5a9b5-9c83-473d-5f62-a16ecde50f2a@intel.com> <86F8CE62-A94B-46BD-9A29-DBE1CC14AA83@amacapital.net> <58d5f029-ee8a-ca93-f0e6-0278db22e208@intel.com> <20210129204601.GG27841@zn.tnic>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.7.0

On 1/29/2021 12:46 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:

On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 12:33:43PM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote:

In that case is there any reason to keep the "depends on CPU_SUP_INTEL"?


Probably not. I haven't heard of the AMD implementation being somehow
different from Intel's.


Ok, I will remove it.

References:
- Re: [PATCH v18 02/25] x86/cet/shstk: Add Kconfig option for user-mode control-flow protection
  - From: Dave Hansen
- Re: [PATCH v18 02/25] x86/cet/shstk: Add Kconfig option for user-mode control-flow protection
  - From: Andy Lutomirski
- Re: [PATCH v18 02/25] x86/cet/shstk: Add Kconfig option for user-mode control-flow protection
  - From: Dave Hansen
- Re: [PATCH v18 02/25] x86/cet/shstk: Add Kconfig option for user-mode control-flow protection
  - From: Borislav Petkov

Prev by Date: Re: [RFC][PATCH 07/13] mm/migrate: make migrate_pages() return nr_succeeded
Next by Date: Re: [PATCH RFC 21/30] hugetlb: Pass vma into huge_pte_alloc()
Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH v18 02/25] x86/cet/shstk: Add Kconfig option for user-mode control-flow protection
Next by thread: Re: [PATCH v18 02/25] x86/cet/shstk: Add Kconfig option for user-mode control-flow protection
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Index of Archives] [Linux ARM Kernel] [Linux ARM] [Linux Omap] [Fedora ARM] [IETF Annouce] [Bugtraq] [Linux OMAP] [Linux MIPS] [eCos] [Asterisk Internet PBX] [Linux API]