[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <fab71cca-1a06-d10b-5129-0188b2790a11@intel.com>
Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2018 11:22:52 -0800
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To: "Van De Ven, Arjan" <arjan.van.de.ven@...el.com>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad@...nel.org>,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw@...zon.co.uk>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/8] x86/spec_ctrl: Add sysctl knobs to enable/disable
SPEC_CTRL feature
On 01/06/2018 09:41 AM, Van De Ven, Arjan wrote:
>>>> .macro DISABLE_IBRS
>>>> - ALTERNATIVE "jmp .Lskip_\@", "", X86_FEATURE_SPEC_CTRL
>>>> + testl $1, dynamic_ibrs
>>> On every system call we end up hammering on this 'dynamic_ibrs'
>>> variable. And it looks like it can be flipped via the IPI mechanism.
>>>
>>> Would it make sense for this to be per-cpu?
>>
>> It's probably better to either just make it __read_mostly or get the
>> static branches that folks were suggesting actually working.
>
> I still wonder if this isn't just better as a boot command line
It's simpler that way. But, ideally, we want to make it runtime
switchable to match the implementation in the distros.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists