linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86/srso: Correct the mitigation status when SMT is disabled

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]

Message-ID: <20230816185830.GOZN0cVl/pJcZUiPGY@fat_crate.local>
Date:   Wed, 16 Aug 2023 20:58:30 +0200
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:     Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...nel.org>
Cc:     Nikolay Borisov <nik.borisov@...e.com>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/srso: Correct the mitigation status when SMT is
 disabled

On Wed, Aug 16, 2023 at 11:29:40AM -0700, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> No, if the bug bit isn't set then that comes from cpu_show_common():
> 
> static ssize_t cpu_show_common(struct device *dev, struct device_attribute *attr,
> 			       char *buf, unsigned int bug)
> {
> 	if (!boot_cpu_has_bug(bug))
> 		return sysfs_emit(buf, "Not affected\n");

Bah, there was that thing too.

Ok, I'll zap the sched_smt_active() branch in srso_show_state() then.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette