[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20191122204204.GA192370@romley-ivt3.sc.intel.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2019 12:42:04 -0800
From: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
H Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com>,
"Raj, Ashok" <ashok.raj@...el.com>,
"Shankar, Ravi V" <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, x86 <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 6/6] x86/split_lock: Enable split lock detection by
kernel parameter
On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 09:23:45PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 06:02:04PM +0000, Luck, Tony wrote:
> > > it requires we get the kernel and firmware clean, but only warns about
> > > dodgy userspace, which I really don't think there is much of.
> > >
> > > getting the kernel clean should be pretty simple.
> >
> > Fenghua has a half dozen additional patches (I think they were
> > all posted in previous iterations of the patch) that were found by
> > code inspection, rather than by actually hitting them.
>
> I thought we merged at least some of that, but maybe my recollection is
> faulty.
At least 2 key fixes are in TIP tree:
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/157384597983.12247.8995835529288193538.tip-bot2@tip-bot2/
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/157384597947.12247.7200239597382357556.tip-bot2@tip-bot2/
The two issues are blocking kernel boot when split lock is enabled.
>
> > Those should go in ahead of this.
>
> Yes, we should make the kernel as clean as possible before doing this.
I'll send out other 6 fixes for atomic bitops shortly. These issues are found
by code inspection.
Thanks.
-Fenghua
Powered by blists - more mailing lists