[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wi0QrKuxQQmNsJhn5rE9Qe-Cz_9NsJOcOM1FK+knLeAFw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2024 08:16:36 -0700
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Nikolay Borisov <nik.borisov@...e.com>
Cc: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...nel.org>, x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Daniel Sneddon <daniel.sneddon@...ux.intel.com>,
Pawan Gupta <pawan.kumar.gupta@...ux.intel.com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Alexandre Chartre <alexandre.chartre@...cle.com>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com>, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
KP Singh <kpsingh@...nel.org>, Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] x86/bugs: Only harden syscalls when needed
On Mon, 15 Apr 2024 at 00:37, Nikolay Borisov <nik.borisov@...e.com> wrote:
>
> To ask again, what do we gain by having this syscall hardening at the
> same time as the always on BHB scrubbing sequence?
What happens the next time some indirect call problem comes up?
If we had had *one* hardware bug in this area, that would be one
thing. But this has been going on for a decade now.
Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists