linux-kernel - Re: [Patch v4 03/18] x86/speculation: Reorganize cpu_show

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 5 Nov 2018 20:17:52 +0100 (CET)
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:     Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>
cc:     Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>,
        Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
        Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
        David Woodhouse <dwmw@...zon.co.uk>,
        Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
        Casey Schaufler <casey.schaufler@...el.com>,
        Asit Mallick <asit.k.mallick@...el.com>,
        Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>,
        Jon Masters <jcm@...hat.com>,
        Waiman Long <longman9394@...il.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [Patch v4 03/18] x86/speculation: Reorganize cpu_show_common()

Tim,

On Mon, 5 Nov 2018, Tim Chen wrote:
> On 11/03/2018 11:07 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> >>  	case X86_BUG_SPECTRE_V2:
> >>  		return sprintf(buf, "%s%s%s%s%s%s\n", spectre_v2_strings[spectre_v2_enabled],
> >> -			       boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_USE_IBPB) ? ", IBPB" : "",
> >>  			       boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_USE_IBRS_FW) ? ", IBRS_FW" : "",
> >> -			       (x86_spec_ctrl_base & SPEC_CTRL_STIBP) ? ", STIBP" : "",
> >> +			       ibpb_state(), stibp_state(),
> >>  			       boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_RSB_CTXSW) ? ", RSB filling" : "",
> >>  			       spectre_v2_module_string());
> > 
> > Any particular reason for changing the output ordering here? If yes, then
> > the changelog should mention it. If no, why?
> > 
> I was putting the features related to user application protection together. It
> was not necessary and I can leave it at the same place.

I have no strong opinion either way and changing it should not confuse user
space tools, but please mention it in the changelog if you decide to group it.

Thanks,

	tglx