Date: Sat, 10 Nov 2007 18:26:31 -0800 From: Colin Percival <cperciva@freebsd.org> To: Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.org> Cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/amd64/amd64 mp_machdep.c src/sys/i386/i386 mp_machdep.c Message-ID: <47366857.7050802@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <47349F8D.5040509@FreeBSD.org> References: <200711081945.lA8JjKcW080540@repoman.freebsd.org> <47337724.9040108@FreeBSD.org> <47340B7F.6040505@freebsd.org> <47349F8D.5040509@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Kris Kennaway wrote: > Colin Percival wrote: >> To quote core@, whom I agree with on this point: >> We think this decision should be revisited once at least one of the >> following occur: new crypto code is made available by crypto vendors to >> address cache-related attacks, or sufficient work is performed on >> scheduling and protection mechanisms to prevent the attack from being >> exploited. >> >> When I have time, I'm working on a cryptographic library ... > > Sounds possibly infeasible and at the very least a long way off. Is it > appropriate to continue to leave hyperthreading disabled for the > indefinite future pending the completion of a library you hope to one > day write? You seem to be ignoring the second half of core's criteria for revisiting this decision: "or sufficient work is performed on scheduling and protection mechanisms to prevent the attack from being exploited". This certainly seems to be the route which involves less work -- but since my expertise is in cryptography rather than schedulers, I can only work on the cryptographic option. Colin Percival
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?47366857.7050802>