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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Fri, 5 Apr 2019 17:26:50 +0200
From:   Borislav Petkov <>
To:     Josh Poimboeuf <>
        Thomas Gleixner <>,
        Ingo Molnar <>,
        "H . Peter Anvin" <>,
        Andy Lutomirski <>,
        Peter Zijlstra <>,
        Jiri Kosina <>,
        Waiman Long <>,
        Andrea Arcangeli <>,
        Jon Masters <>,
        Benjamin Herrenschmidt <>,
        Paul Mackerras <>,
        Michael Ellerman <>,,
        Martin Schwidefsky <>,
        Heiko Carstens <>,,
        Catalin Marinas <>,
        Will Deacon <>,,,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <>,
        Tyler Hicks <>,
        Linus Torvalds <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 2/5] x86/speculation: Add support for
 'cpu_spec_mitigations=' cmdline options

On Fri, Apr 05, 2019 at 09:31:01AM -0500, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> My thinking was that the individual options could be used to override
> the global option.  But maybe that's overkill?  I dunno.

You mean if the user deliberately types:

"cpu_spec_mitigations=off spectre_v2=auto"

on the cmdline to turn off all and then enable only one?

Hmm, yap, sounds like an overkill to me. Then I'd probably do:

	pr_err("Make up your mind already!\n");


I'd say let's do the simpler and cleaner thing now and think about
supporting this overkill when it really turns out that it is needed.

> I assume you mean just the part where L1TF_MITIGATION_DEFAULT is added?




Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists