[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180226193711.GS4377@pd.tnic>
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2018 20:37:11 +0100
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@...il.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, kvm <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: X86: Allow userspace to define the microcode version
On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 09:39:12AM -0500, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel.c
> index d19e903214b4..87d044ce837f 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel.c
> @@ -144,6 +144,13 @@ static bool bad_spectre_microcode(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
> {
> int i;
>
> + /*
> + * We know that the hypervisor lie to us on the microcode version so
> + * we may as well trust that it is running the correct version.
> + */
> + if (boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_HYPERVISOR))
I guess
cpu_has(c, X86_FEATURE_HYPERVISOR)
since we're passing a ptr to the current CPU.
It boils down to the same thing in the end but this is bit nicer and
besides the rest of the code uses cpu_has() too.
Otherwise, yap, this looks like a good idea.
Thx.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists