[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+55aFzm7zLd5BPtpp9MYMuP8We55bMd7noeLPrXiKfDynO6JA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2018 16:43:50 -0800
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Alan Cox <gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: "Van De Ven, Arjan" <arjan.van.de.ven@...el.com>,
"valdis.kletnieks@...edu" <valdis.kletnieks@...edu>,
Jon Masters <jcm@...masters.org>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Hansen, Dave" <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86/speculation: Support "Enhanced IBRS" on future CPUs
On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 4:13 PM, Alan Cox <gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote:
>
> In theory there's nothing stopping a guest getting a 'you are about to
> gain/lose IBRS' message or having a new 'CPU' hotplugged and the old one
> removed.
I'm not convinced we handle the case of hotplug CPU's with different
CPU models correctly.
In fact, I'd be very surprised it it worked in the general case.
Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists