linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86/bugs: Allow STIBP with IBRS

lists.openwall.net		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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 20 Feb 2023 11:38:49 -0800
From:   KP Singh <kpsingh@...nel.org>
To:     Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...nel.org>
Cc:     Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        pjt@...gle.com, evn@...gle.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
        mingo@...hat.com, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, x86@...nel.org,
        hpa@...or.com, peterz@...radead.org,
        pawan.kumar.gupta@...ux.intel.com, kim.phillips@....com,
        alexandre.chartre@...cle.com, daniel.sneddon@...ux.intel.com,
        José Oliveira <joseloliveira11@...il.com>,
        Rodrigo Branco <rodrigo@...nelhacking.com>,
        Alexandra Sandulescu <aesa@...gle.com>,
        Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/bugs: Allow STIBP with IBRS

On Mon, Feb 20, 2023 at 11:35 AM Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Feb 20, 2023 at 11:16:45AM -0800, KP Singh wrote:
> > > As far as I can tell, that document was never updated to describe
> > > spectre_v2=ibrs in the first place.  That would be a whole 'nother patch
> > > which I'm not volunteering for.  Nice try ;-)
> >
> > This should at least be documented in the code.
> >
> > Now it seems like it is not okay to work with people on the list and
> > just send revisions bypassing them. This is not something we do in the
> > kernel area I come from (an x86 favorite ;)).  Please feel free to go
> > with Josh's version (or its future revisions). If you want me to
> > re-spin with some comments, happy to. If not, please do at least give
> > me Reported-by here.
>
> It's a common practice even outside of x86.  I'd recommend not taking it
> personally.  In the end it's all about what produces better code.
>
> And please don't take this the wrong way, but sometimes it takes a bad
> patch to inspire a better one.  I mean that with no disrespect, I myself
> have sent many bad patches.

Appreciate the clarification! Thank you so much.

>
> And if you don't like my patch, fine, send a v2...

I can also take a stab at the Documentation piece, this will make
Boris happy too. Will send a v2 later today.

>
> --
> Josh