[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180212130640.GK25181@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 14:06:40 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Thomas Mingarelli <thomas.mingarelli@....com>, hpa@...or.com,
tglx@...utronix.de, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org,
Dave Hansen <dave@...1.net>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [tip:x86/pti] x86/speculation: Use IBRS if available before
calling into firmware
On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 12:27:19PM +0000, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Mon, 2018-02-12 at 12:50 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > Wait, we're doing firmware from NMI? That sounds like a _REALLY_ bad
> > idea.
>
> And spin_lock_irqsave() too. Which is probably why I missed the fact
> that this was being called in NMI context.
>
> Yay for HP and their persistent attempts to "value subtract" in their
> firmware offerings.
>
> I'm tempted to drop that part of the patch and declare that if you're
> using this driver, the potential for stray branch prediction when you
> call into the firmware from the NMI handler is the *least* of your
> problems.
We should probably mark it BROKEN or something, or move it into staging.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists