[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <a433e3f1-9cf9-11ac-e141-ca6d6c607441@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2018 18:15:01 +0100
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>
Cc: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com>,
"Woodhouse, David" <dwmw@...zon.co.uk>,
"pavel@....cz" <pavel@....cz>,
"tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com" <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"torvalds@...ux-foundation.org" <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"andi@...stfloor.org" <andi@...stfloor.org>,
"gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk" <gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
"gregkh@...ux-foundation.org" <gregkh@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: Avoid speculative indirect calls in kernel
On 04/01/2018 18:13, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 01/04/2018 08:25 AM, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
>> It's only where SPEC_CTRL is missing and only IBPB_SUPPORT is
>> available, that ibrs 0 ibpb 2 is the only option to fix variant#2 for
>> good.
>
> Could you help us decode what "ibrs 0 ibpb 2" means to you?
IBRS 0 = disabled
IBRS 1 = only kernel sets IBRS=1
IBRS 2 = indirect branch prediction fully disabled, or do the right
thing on future processors
IBPB 0 = disabled
IBPB 1 = on context switch
IBPB 2 = on every kernel or hypervisor entry
Thanks,
Paolo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists