[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20241009061102.GBZwYediMceBEfSEFo@fat_crate.local>
Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2024 08:11:02 +0200
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org, Robert Gill <rtgill82@...il.com>,
Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com>, stable@...r.kernel.org,
#@...-bot2.tec.linutronix.de, 5.10+@...-bot2.tec.linutronix.de,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>,
Pawan Gupta <pawan.kumar.gupta@...ux.intel.com>, x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [tip: x86/urgent] x86/bugs: Use code segment selector for VERW
operand
On Tue, Oct 08, 2024 at 10:45:36PM -0000, tip-bot2 for Pawan Gupta wrote:
> .macro CLEAR_CPU_BUFFERS
> - ALTERNATIVE "", __stringify(verw _ASM_RIP(mds_verw_sel)), X86_FEATURE_CLEAR_CPU_BUF
> +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
> + ALTERNATIVE "", "verw mds_verw_sel(%rip)", X86_FEATURE_CLEAR_CPU_BUF
> +#else
> + /*
> + * In 32bit mode, the memory operand must be a %cs reference. The data
> + * segments may not be usable (vm86 mode), and the stack segment may not
> + * be flat (ESPFIX32).
> + */
> + ALTERNATIVE "", "verw %cs:mds_verw_sel", X86_FEATURE_CLEAR_CPU_BUF
> +#endif
So why didn't we ifdef the "verw mds_verw_sel(%rip)" and "verw
%cs:mds_verw_sel" macro argument instead of adding more bigger ugly ifdeffery?
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
Powered by blists - more mailing lists