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;
Date:   Tue, 13 Feb 2018 17:02:59 +0100 (CET)
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To:     Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>
cc:     Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Nick Lowe <nick.lowe@gmail.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        stable@vger.kernel.org, David Woodhouse <dwmw@amazon.co.uk>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
        gnomes@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk, ashok.raj@intel.com,
        karahmed@amazon.de, torvalds@linux-foundation.org,
        peterz@infradead.org, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        pbonzini@redhat.com, tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.9 43/92] x86/pti: Do not enable PTI on CPUs which are
 not vulnerable to Meltdown
In-Reply-To: <20180213155603.GK10945@tassilo.jf.intel.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1802131659520.1130@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
References: <20180209133931.211869118@linuxfoundation.org> <20180209133934.259299920@linuxfoundation.org> <CADSoG1tjU2G9FUNOFod4ZsYSw7gOSsza_JWUv5H6pAkbftWywA@mail.gmail.com> <20180213150007.GJ26982@kroah.com> <b0680083-5cd2-e152-0d64-f5a931274a8e@linux.intel.com>
 <20180213155603.GK10945@tassilo.jf.intel.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (DEB 202 2017-01-01)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, 13 Feb 2018, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 07:09:44AM -0800, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > > 
> > > So, any hints on what you think should be the correct fix here?
> > 
> > the patch sure looks correct to me, it now has a nice table for CPU IDs
> > including all of AMD (and soon hopefully the existing Intel ones that are not exposed to meltdown)
> 
> I don't think the table is nice, it's a white list that would need
> to be maintained forever.

No. The table is basically excluding families <=5 and a few individual
ones. Anything newer than that should tell via ARCH_CAP_RDCL_NO and not
need any entry.

Thanks,

	tglx