[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180220010319.19c60053@alans-desktop>
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2018 01:03:19 +0000
From: Alan Cox <gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
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, 19 Feb 2018 16:43:50 -0800
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> 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.
We don't. And even if we did the user space doesn't. It would be a
painful task to resolve.
Alan
Powered by blists - more mailing lists