[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7a078451-172c-40f3-c2c7-4472c5006532@intel.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2022 09:40:29 -0800
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To: Kim Phillips <kim.phillips@....com>, x86@...nel.org
Cc: Babu Moger <Babu.Moger@....com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>,
Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Joao Martins <joao.m.martins@...cle.com>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw@...zon.co.uk>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>,
Alexey Kardashevskiy <aik@....com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 6/7] x86/cpu: Support AMD Automatic IBRS
On 11/30/22 17:50, Kim Phillips wrote:
> @@ -1240,8 +1240,11 @@ static const struct {
> { "retpoline,lfence", SPECTRE_V2_CMD_RETPOLINE_LFENCE, false },
> { "retpoline,generic", SPECTRE_V2_CMD_RETPOLINE_GENERIC, false },
> { "eibrs", SPECTRE_V2_CMD_EIBRS, false },
> + { "autoibrs", SPECTRE_V2_CMD_EIBRS, false },
> { "eibrs,lfence", SPECTRE_V2_CMD_EIBRS_LFENCE, false },
> + { "autoibrs,lfence", SPECTRE_V2_CMD_EIBRS_LFENCE, false },
> { "eibrs,retpoline", SPECTRE_V2_CMD_EIBRS_RETPOLINE, false },
> + { "autoibrs,retpoline", SPECTRE_V2_CMD_EIBRS_RETPOLINE, false },
> { "auto", SPECTRE_V2_CMD_AUTO, false },
> { "ibrs", SPECTRE_V2_CMD_IBRS, false },
I don't think we should expose "autoibrs" to end users like this.
"eibrs" means always-on IBRS. Intel did it first, so gets to name it.
Those are the rules, and it's why we call it "x86_64" and not whatever
Intel's silly name for it was.
Also, expanding the strings:
> + [SPECTRE_V2_EIBRS_RETPOLINE] = "Mitigation: Enhanced / Automatic IBRS + Retpolines",
is fine, but adding new user-visible options that we have to document is
not.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists