From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C3C9C4338F for ; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 16:29:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49E3F60FC1 for ; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 16:29:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S238802AbhHYQ3u (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Aug 2021 12:29:50 -0400 Received: from mail.skyhub.de ([5.9.137.197]:55040 "EHLO mail.skyhub.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S237216AbhHYQ3q (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Aug 2021 12:29:46 -0400 Received: from zn.tnic (p200300ec2f0ea700924cc147a25a6e09.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [IPv6:2003:ec:2f0e:a700:924c:c147:a25a:6e09]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.skyhub.de (SuperMail on ZX Spectrum 128k) with ESMTPSA id 05A8A1EC01FC; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 18:28:55 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=alien8.de; s=dkim; t=1629908935; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references; bh=kXTBbKX0N8PVFTNyf4PA8VUf4fQWGNpL4TXA4DMB1bg=; b=mRh7IF3B7odzldZV3V/mzJ72uHB8k0Pq9hyfRcu4jLE78QMHTDYO2Pe1ADumwvclqVsmRR 8dwOilrLxXRsANVS/QE7TJa1bSM9fXknzuzuyY0hgB+AWSo+/7CrTo4AlGzk7a5lEd6p0Q 7VBIyUc8virQJPI3RulnowUJ3yaHAlc= Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2021 18:29:31 +0200 From: Borislav Petkov To: Michael Roth Cc: Brijesh Singh , x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org, linux-coco@lists.linux.dev, linux-mm@kvack.org, Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , Joerg Roedel , Tom Lendacky , "H. Peter Anvin" , Ard Biesheuvel , Paolo Bonzini , Sean Christopherson , Vitaly Kuznetsov , Wanpeng Li , Jim Mattson , Andy Lutomirski , Dave Hansen , Sergio Lopez , Peter Gonda , Peter Zijlstra , Srinivas Pandruvada , David Rientjes , Dov Murik , Tobin Feldman-Fitzthum , Vlastimil Babka , "Kirill A . Shutemov" , Andi Kleen , tony.luck@intel.com, marcorr@google.com, sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com Subject: Re: [PATCH Part1 v5 23/38] x86/head/64: set up a startup %gs for stack protector Message-ID: References: <20210820151933.22401-1-brijesh.singh@amd.com> <20210820151933.22401-24-brijesh.singh@amd.com> <20210825151835.wzgabnl7rbrge3a2@amd.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210825151835.wzgabnl7rbrge3a2@amd.com> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 10:18:35AM -0500, Michael Roth wrote: > On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 04:29:13PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 20, 2021 at 10:19:18AM -0500, Brijesh Singh wrote: > > > From: Michael Roth > > > > > > As of commit 103a4908ad4d ("x86/head/64: Disable stack protection for > > > head$(BITS).o") kernel/head64.c is compiled with -fno-stack-protector > > > to allow a call to set_bringup_idt_handler(), which would otherwise > > > have stack protection enabled with CONFIG_STACKPROTECTOR_STRONG. While > > > sufficient for that case, this will still cause issues if we attempt to ^^^ I'm tired of repeating the same review comments with you guys: Who's "we"? Please use passive voice in your text: no "we" or "I", etc. Personal pronouns are ambiguous in text, especially with so many parties/companies/etc developing the kernel so let's avoid them please. How about you pay more attention? > I didn't realize the the 32-bit path was something you were suggesting > to have added in this patch, but I'll take a look at that as well. If you're going to remove the -no-stack-protector thing for that file, then pls remove it for both 32- and 64-bit. I.e., the revert what 103a4908ad4d did. -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette