[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1529680267.4364.50.camel@linux.intel.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2018 16:11:07 +0100
From: Alan Cox <alan@...ux.intel.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...ux.intel.com>,
Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@...el.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
Rafael Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
Ravi V Shankar <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, x86 <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 06/16] x86/split_lock: Save #AC setting for split
lock in firmware in boot time and restore the setting in reboot
On Thu, 2018-06-21 at 21:58 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Sun, May 27, 2018 at 08:45:55AM -0700, Fenghua Yu wrote:
> > Firmware may contain split locked instructions.
>
> I think that's the wrong attitude. You should mandate in your BIOS
> development guide that Firmware _MUST_NOT_ contain unaligned LOCK
> prefixed instructions.
>
In the longer term I would agree entirely with that sentiment.
Alan
Powered by blists - more mailing lists