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 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C8EEC433F5 for ; Tue, 15 Feb 2022 21:42:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S243424AbiBOVmi (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Feb 2022 16:42:38 -0500 Received: from mxb-00190b01.gslb.pphosted.com ([23.128.96.19]:43898 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232789AbiBOVme (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Feb 2022 16:42:34 -0500 Received: from mga09.intel.com (mga09.intel.com [134.134.136.24]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BFD5477A98; Tue, 15 Feb 2022 13:42:23 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1644961343; x=1676497343; h=message-id:date:mime-version:to:cc:references:from: subject:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=6nOQyQn4qkItz0k8hfiai/vmAMIv8bluxSimBsP+gyI=; b=ErR1zqYS5J44FTU31iPZWJE0u0sfmT1nU5JEZ9CdiGEiYNhMGQXaUN73 a4HIV3laGZ/KSvr4HfEP59M8GUr9N8In0MvgyTyZRbxrgz4RhdoUc/XVh 0U73vykeknXNxI68QTFSksnqbgEezYZDKGRwCm/WxMuy6dioZTrpuKCHt rSG4tuqFMZg4c9CXv5yB2dTgVES/aD9Kn9wj9Sw5cb9TqEVmEmRNlEgHJ yauJMA+m8rTCcz+COoN770FE8L79Qznk0j52n+tmOl7qmJW/r/gWvlna5 Z7YEE/QpRImgBy62Ps3wx3ssDR4bZfdrVARvjZJdHWhwtfSt2DjYxkE1r Q==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6200,9189,10259"; a="250200652" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.88,371,1635231600"; d="scan'208";a="250200652" Received: from orsmga007.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.58]) by orsmga102.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 15 Feb 2022 13:42:23 -0800 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.88,371,1635231600"; d="scan'208";a="529080814" Received: from tngodup-mobl.amr.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.209.32.98]) ([10.209.32.98]) by orsmga007-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 15 Feb 2022 13:42:23 -0800 Message-ID: <066c9f4b-b0a3-9343-9db9-1c1c7303da6f@intel.com> Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2022 13:42:19 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.5.0 Content-Language: en-US To: Brian Geffon , Greg KH Cc: Thomas Gleixner , Willis Kung , Guenter Roeck , Borislav Petkov , Andy Lutomirski , "# v4 . 10+" , the arch/x86 maintainers , LKML References: <543efc25-9b99-53cd-e305-d8b4d917b64b@intel.com> <20220215192233.8717-1-bgeffon@google.com> From: Dave Hansen Subject: Re: [PATCH stable 5.4,5.10] x86/fpu: Correct pkru/xstate inconsistency In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2/15/22 13:32, Brian Geffon wrote: >> How was this tested, and what do the maintainers of this subsystem >> think? And will you be around to fix the bugs in this when they are >> found? > This has been trivial to reproduce, I've used a small repro which I've > put here: https://gist.github.com/bgaff/9f8cbfc8dd22e60f9492e4f0aff8f04f > , I also was able to reproduce this using the protection_keys self > tests on a 11th Gen Core i5-1135G7. I've got an i7-1165G7, but I'm not seeing any failures on a 5.11 distro kernel. How long does this take for you to reproduce?