Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Mon, 11 Feb 2019 20:10:59 +0100
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
To:     Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@gmail.com>
Cc:     Rick Edgecombe <rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Damian Tometzki <linux_dti@icloud.com>,
        linux-integrity <linux-integrity@vger.kernel.org>,
        LSM List <linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com>,
        Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
        Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
        Kristen Carlson Accardi <kristen@linux.intel.com>,
        "Dock, Deneen T" <deneen.t.dock@intel.com>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
        Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 10/20] x86: avoid W^X being broken during modules
 loading
Message-ID: <20190211191059.GR19618@zn.tnic>
References: <20190129003422.9328-1-rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com>
 <20190129003422.9328-11-rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com>
 <20190211182956.GN19618@zn.tnic>
 <1533F2BB-2284-499B-9912-6D74D0B87BC1@gmail.com>
 <20190211190108.GP19618@zn.tnic>
 <A671F14F-3E03-4A97-9F54-426533077E0C@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <A671F14F-3E03-4A97-9F54-426533077E0C@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 11:09:25AM -0800, Nadav Amit wrote:
> It is just that I find the use of static_cpu_has()/boot_cpu_has() to be very
> inconsistent. I doubt that show_cpuinfo_misc(), copy_fpstate_to_sigframe(),
> or i915_memcpy_init_early() that use static_cpu_has() are any hotter than
> text_poke_early().

Would some beefing of the comment over it help?

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.