| From: |
| Alan Cox <gnomes-AT-lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> |
| To: |
| James Bottomley <James.Bottomley-AT-HansenPartnership.com> |
| Subject: |
| Re: [PATCH 06/18] x86, barrier: stop speculation for failed access_ok |
| Date: |
| Sun, 7 Jan 2018 19:24:18 +0000 |
| Message-ID: |
| <20180107192418.0f0b66a8@alans-desktop> |
| Cc: |
| David Miller <davem-AT-davemloft.net>, w-AT-1wt.eu, alexei.starovoitov-AT-gmail.com, torvalds-AT-linux-foundation.org, dan.j.williams-AT-intel.com, linux-kernel-AT-vger.kernel.org, linux-arch-AT-vger.kernel.org, ak-AT-linux.intel.com, arnd-AT-arndb.de, gregkh-AT-linuxfoundation.org, peterz-AT-infradead.org, netdev-AT-vger.kernel.org, mingo-AT-redhat.com, hpa-AT-zytor.com, tglx-AT-linutronix.de |
> everyone. I'm not saying this always happens, but it is reasonable to
> let the iterative pushback see if we can get to better code in this
> case rather than trying to cut it of with the "because *security*"
> argument.
>
I'm not arguing otherwise - I'd just prefer most users machines are
secure while we have the discussion and while we see what other
architectural tricks people can come up with
Alan
