linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH 11/17] x86/cpu: Remove all SRSO interface nonsense

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:   Wed, 9 Aug 2023 16:43:35 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...nel.org>
Cc:     x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, David.Kaplan@....com,
        Andrew.Cooper3@...rix.com, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 11/17] x86/cpu: Remove all SRSO interface nonsense

On Wed, Aug 09, 2023 at 10:05:30AM -0400, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 09, 2023 at 09:12:29AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > @@ -2607,26 +2447,26 @@ static ssize_t srbds_show_state(char *bu
> >  static ssize_t retbleed_show_state(char *buf)
> >  {
> >  	if (retbleed_mitigation == RETBLEED_MITIGATION_UNRET ||
> > +	    retbleed_mitigation == RETBLEED_MITIGATION_UNRET_SRSO ||
> > +	    retbleed_mitigation == RETBLEED_MITIGATION_UNRET_SRSO_ALIAS ||
> >  	    retbleed_mitigation == RETBLEED_MITIGATION_IBPB) {
> 
> These retbleed_show_state() changes probably belong in that other patch
> which adds the retbleed= cmdline options.

Ah yes, lost hunk that. Let me move it there.

> > +
> >  		if (boot_cpu_data.x86_vendor != X86_VENDOR_AMD &&
> >  		    boot_cpu_data.x86_vendor != X86_VENDOR_HYGON)
> >  			return sysfs_emit(buf, "Vulnerable: untrained return thunk / IBPB on non-AMD based uarch\n");
> >  
> > -		return sysfs_emit(buf, "%s; SMT %s\n", retbleed_strings[retbleed_mitigation],
> > +		return sysfs_emit(buf, "%s; SMT %s%s\n", retbleed_strings[retbleed_mitigation],
> >  				  !sched_smt_active() ? "disabled" :
> >  				  spectre_v2_user_stibp == SPECTRE_V2_USER_STRICT ||
> >  				  spectre_v2_user_stibp == SPECTRE_V2_USER_STRICT_PREFERRED ?
> > -				  "enabled with STIBP protection" : "vulnerable");
> > -	}
> > +				  "enabled with STIBP protection" : "vulnerable",
> > +				  cpu_has_ibpb_brtype_microcode() ? "" : ", no SRSO microcode");
> 
> Hm?  What does missing microcode have to do with SMT?

semi-colon then, instead of comma ?