Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 18 Apr 2002 07:14:37 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 18 Apr 2002 07:14:36 -0400 Received: from ns.suse.de ([213.95.15.193]:6419 "HELO Cantor.suse.de") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Thu, 18 Apr 2002 07:14:36 -0400 Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2002 13:14:31 +0200 From: Andi Kleen To: Alan Cox Cc: Andrea Arcangeli , Doug Ledford , jh@suse.cz, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jakub@redhat.com, aj@suse.de, ak@suse.de, pavel@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz Subject: Re: SSE related security hole Message-ID: <20020418131431.B22558@wotan.suse.de> In-Reply-To: <20020418072615.I14322@dualathlon.random> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.22.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Apr 18, 2002 at 12:18:34PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote: > > This mean the mmx isn't really backwards compatible and that's > > potentially a problem for all the legacy x86 multiuser operative > > systems. That's an hardware design bug, not a software problem. In > > short running a 2.[02] kernel on a MMX capable CPU isn't secure, the > > same potentially applies to windows NT and other unix, no matter of SSE. > > That was my initial reaction but when I reread the documentation the > Intel folks are actually saying even back in Pentium MMX days that it isnt > guaranteed that the FP/MMX state are not seperate registers In this case it would be possible to only do the explicit clear when the CPU does support sse1. For mmx only it shouldn't be needed. For sse2 also not. -Andi - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/