[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20231006095410.GBZR/ZQmaako5yMhVs@fat_crate.local>
Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2023 11:54:10 +0200
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Breno Leitao <leitao@...ian.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, x86@...nel.org,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...nel.org>,
Pawan Gupta <pawan.kumar.gupta@...ux.intel.com>, leit@...a.com,
"open list:X86 ARCHITECTURE (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)"
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] x86/bugs: Add a separate config for each mitigation
On Thu, Oct 05, 2023 at 11:29:02AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> ...
> "complex" conditionals may also be annoying, but dammit, they are
> important documentation about why we do those things, and unlike just
> comments that will inevitably bit-rot, they have semantics and get
> tested.
Thanks for explaining - it does make sense to me.
So, from the looks of it, we're halfway there:
- SPECULATION_MITIGATIONS is there for people who want to whack off the
whole crap
- the separate Kconfig switches are for people who want to do
a finer-grained control. And yeah, they might be annoying the first
time but you do them once and then you use the .config forever, like
with anything else.
So yeah, sounds like a plan. Breno, please add Linus' explanation to the
commit message why we're doing it this way, when sending your new
version.
Thx.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
Powered by blists - more mailing lists