[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2018 10:59:38 +0100
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: "Lendacky, Thomas" <Thomas.Lendacky@....com>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw@...zon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] x86/speculation: Add support for STIBP always-on
preferred mode
On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 07:37:26PM -0800, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> Hmmm. I've not seen the V1 of this (it's not in my inbox) but the v1->v2
> changes contain:
You're on CC:
https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20181211190959.28321.56433.stgit@tlendack-t1.amdoffice.net
>
> > > - Removed explicit SPECTRE_V2_USER_STRICT_PREFERRED mode
>
> Now I really have to ask why?
>
> Neither the extra variable nor the cpu feature check are pretty. An
> explicit mode is way better in terms of code clarity and you get the proper
> printout via spectre_v2_user_strings.
Actually, now that I've slept on it, I think we should do this just
like X86_FEATURE_IBRS_ENHANCED - as a modifier for SPECTRE_V2_CMD_AUTO
or _FORCE options.
And that has its own mode SPECTRE_V2_IBRS_ENHANCED.
Makes sense?
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists