From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933155AbYETPET (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 May 2008 11:04:19 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1763640AbYETPEF (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 May 2008 11:04:05 -0400 Received: from one.firstfloor.org ([213.235.205.2]:59376 "EHLO one.firstfloor.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756386AbYETPEE (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 May 2008 11:04:04 -0400 Message-ID: <4832E85B.4080303@firstfloor.org> Date: Tue, 20 May 2008 17:03:55 +0200 From: Andi Kleen User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.12 (X11/20060911) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "H. Peter Anvin" CC: Suresh Siddha , Mikael Pettersson , mingo@elte.hu, tglx@linutronix.de, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, roland@redhat.com, drepper@redhat.com, Hongjiu.lu@intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, arjan@linux.intel.com, rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk, dan@debian.org, asit.k.mallick@intel.com Subject: Re: [RFC] x86: xsave/xrstor support, ucontext_t extensions References: <20080513011030.GA31448@linux-os.sc.intel.com> <18477.35703.679574.760417@harpo.it.uu.se> <20080518013416.GB30034@linux-os.sc.intel.com> <18481.37905.297556.288317@harpo.it.uu.se> <20080520015723.GD30034@linux-os.sc.intel.com> <4832A173.6020203@firstfloor.org> <4832E672.3090702@zytor.com> In-Reply-To: <4832E672.3090702@zytor.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org H. Peter Anvin wrote: > Andi Kleen wrote: >>> Ok. CPU folks are planning to make some of the bytes at the end of >>> fxsave >>> image, SW usable. >> >> Are they always zeroed in earlier CPUs though? If not that wouldn't >> work 100% reliably because whatever cookie you put in could have been >> there before by chance. >> >> I don't see anything in the SDM guaranteeing zeroing. >> > > I'm pretty sure they weren't zeroed by the CPUs. If they weren't zeroed > *by the kernel*, there might have been an information leak. I don't think there is one. We never copy fxsave completely out of the kernel. x86-64 does FXSAVE directly in/out user space, but the only leak is what there was before. -Andi