linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 0/5] arm64: errata: Rework Spectre BHB mitigations to not assume "safe"

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <174197748983.735859.13306599472795958808.b4-ty@arm.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2025 18:42:42 +0000
From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
To: Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
Cc: Roxana Bradescu <roxabee@...gle.com>,
	Julius Werner <jwerner@...omium.org>,
	bjorn.andersson@....qualcomm.com,
	Trilok Soni <quic_tsoni@...cinc.com>,
	linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
	Florian Fainelli <florian.fainelli@...adcom.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	Jeffrey Hugo <quic_jhugo@...cinc.com>,
	Scott Bauer <sbauer@...cinc.com>,
	Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@....com>,
	Besar Wicaksono <bwicaksono@...dia.com>,
	D Scott Phillips <scott@...amperecomputing.com>,
	Easwar Hariharan <eahariha@...ux.microsoft.com>,
	James Morse <james.morse@....com>,
	Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@...ux.dev>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/5] arm64: errata: Rework Spectre BHB mitigations to not assume "safe"

On Tue, 07 Jan 2025 12:05:57 -0800, Douglas Anderson wrote:
> Recently I realized that a device with some Qualcomm Kryo 4xx cores
> reported in `lscpu` that it was _not_ vulnerable to Spectre BHB. This
> seemed unlikely to me.
> 
> I wrote up a patch series to attempt (with a lot of guesswork) to add
> Qualcomm cores to the tables governing how the Spectre BHB mitigation
> worked.
> 
> [...]

Applied to arm64 (for-next/spectre-bhb-assume-vulnerable), thanks!

As per Will's suggestion at the end of last year:

https://lore.kernel.org/r/20241219175128.GA25477@willie-the-truck/

Doug has reworked the code to assume vulnerable by default. James did
suggest some splitting of patch 2 but given that Doug doesn't have time
for a respin I decided to queue the patches. If anyone has a strong
opinion, please let me know (and reworking the series is welcomed).

[1/5] arm64: errata: Add QCOM_KRYO_4XX_GOLD to the spectre_bhb_k24_list
      https://git.kernel.org/arm64/c/ed1ce841245d
[2/5] arm64: errata: Assume that unknown CPUs _are_ vulnerable to Spectre BHB
      https://git.kernel.org/arm64/c/e403e8538359
[3/5] arm64: errata: Add KRYO 2XX/3XX/4XX silver cores to Spectre BHB safe list
      https://git.kernel.org/arm64/c/0c9fc6e652cd
[4/5] arm64: cputype: Add MIDR_CORTEX_A76AE
      https://git.kernel.org/arm64/c/a9b5bd81b294
[5/5] arm64: errata: Add newer ARM cores to the spectre_bhb_loop_affected() lists
      https://git.kernel.org/arm64/c/a5951389e58d

-- 
Catalin