[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y6RVvRg20Xc6IR4k@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2022 14:03:57 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: "Li, Xin3" <xin3.li@...el.com>
Cc: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
"bp@...en8.de" <bp@...en8.de>,
"dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com" <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
"hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>,
"andrew.cooper3@...rix.com" <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com>,
"Christopherson,, Sean" <seanjc@...gle.com>,
"pbonzini@...hat.com" <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
"Shankar, Ravi V" <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 14/32] x86/fred: header file with FRED definitions
On Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 02:58:06AM +0000, Li, Xin3 wrote:
> > > +/* Flags above the CS selector (regs->csl) */
> > > +#define FRED_CSL_ENABLE_NMI _BITUL(28)
> > > +#define FRED_CSL_ALLOW_SINGLE_STEP _BITUL(25)
> > > +#define FRED_CSL_INTERRUPT_SHADOW _BITUL(24)
> >
> > What's the state of IBT WAIT-FOR-ENDBR vs this? That really should also get a
> > high CS bit.
>
> FRED does provide more possibilities :)
That's not an answer. IBT has a clear defect and FRED *should* fix it.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists