Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <477cc452f17665440978ae1e227861ca.squirrel@twosheds.infradead.org>
References: <1516476182-5153-1-git-send-email-karahmed@amazon.de>
 <1516476182-5153-5-git-send-email-karahmed@amazon.de> <20180121112224.GH2269@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <477cc452f17665440978ae1e227861ca.squirrel@twosheds.infradead.org>
From:   "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>
Date:   Sun, 21 Jan 2018 06:07:11 -0800
Message-ID: <CAMe9rOqJHATOc0GJMM-+Zf9_+7EFYXDPazreJ_KiPNnOGDEd+g@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 04/10] x86/mm: Only flush indirect branches when switching
 into non dumpable process
To:     David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        KarimAllah Ahmed <karahmed@amazon.de>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
        Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
        Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>,
        Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@intel.com>,
        Asit Mallick <asit.k.mallick@intel.com>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
        David Woodhouse <dwmw@amazon.co.uk>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Janakarajan Natarajan <janakarajan.natarajan@amd.com>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
        Jun Nakajima <jun.nakajima@intel.com>,
        Laura Abbott <labbott@redhat.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
        =?UTF-8?B?UmFkaW0gS3LEjW3DocWZ?= <rkrcmar@redhat.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>,
        Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
        x86@kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Sun, Jan 21, 2018 at 4:04 AM, David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 08:22:55PM +0100, KarimAllah Ahmed wrote:
>>> From: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>
>>>
>>> Flush indirect branches when switching into a process that marked
>>> itself non dumpable.  This protects high value processes like gpg
>>> better, without having too high performance overhead.
>>
>> So if I understand it right, this is only needed if the 'other'
>> executable itself is susceptible to spectre. If say someone audited gpg
>> for spectre-v1 and build it with retpoline, it would be safe to not
>> issue the IBPB, right?
>
>
> Spectre V2 not v1. V1 is separate.
> For V2 retpoline is enough... as long as all the libraries have it too.
>
>> So would it make sense to provide an ELF flag / personality thing such
>> that userspace can indicate its spectre-safe?
>
> Yes, Arjan and I were pondering that yesterday; it probably does make
> sense. Also for allowing a return to userspace after vmexit, if the army
> process itself is so marked.

Please take a look at how CET is handled in program property in
x86-64 psABI for CET:

https://github.com/hjl-tools/x86-psABI/wiki/x86-64-psABI-cet.pdf


-- 
H.J.