[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230811102748.GEZNYNJEeDxTqcOLvj@fat_crate.local>
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2023 12:27:48 +0200
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...nel.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, David.Kaplan@....com,
Andrew.Cooper3@...rix.com, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 06/17] x86/cpu: Add SRSO untrain to retbleed=
On Thu, Aug 10, 2023 at 12:10:03PM -0400, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> I tend to agree that SRSO is a new issue and should have its own sysfs
> and cmdline options (though a separate CONFIG option is overkill IMO).
Yeah, there's a patch floating around adding a config option for every
mitigation. Apparently people want to build-time disable them all.
> The mitigations are unfortunately intertwined, but we've been in that
> situation several times before (e.g., spectre_v2 + intel retbleed).
Yap.
And if you recall, keeping Intel Retbleed from AMD Retbleed apart was
already a PITA at the time so adding yet another one behind that flag
would be madness.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
Powered by blists - more mailing lists