Received: by 10.223.185.116 with SMTP id b49csp3847917wrg; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 08:38:38 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AH8x227tisik3SlwhW9Z7u180RO6yOB2Zccp8HRfLwkqN4CFaYB1duIFET0sWpDi/hm6EfITbF0R X-Received: by 10.98.0.17 with SMTP id 17mr1779637pfa.63.1518539918455; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 08:38:38 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1518539918; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=gF9ifZDW/nN7NbTAGU0iMl7o7+x18B+FKhEha6/wWkzgw3DElB275juQd7bXgyBR4J g8vao/SIeHb319cJqs67FRY4+VlwRclPlqcK0s044Y+VRCQ3QIKlxqaHW5LTy7xESBym 4reA+JJ+7dO5g4ZHqWv1wfwNktktKXozd3bMTBqgKKIJkoSwFXz6b5efcvc+EkCGUNE/ jCOlWWD/JUzn8OTEgKpfctvZ7sdxfkSpVmFtRoOJHjWRtvUUaIU3aF+sUByRqMO4U4jw SjMzv9Zk0caEpSo11BhmY2RqVSr3e76u8zfbmsAjAh17IFyuHKeurZ6JK/9uuJrTfRO3 IDNg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc :to:from:date:arc-authentication-results; bh=UGDC0Ss1zsjsJVU95E2lkLp7/YeZC9EqSTwZZ1jrmoc=; b=bF+o+Sz0+WTfZ4t1DOAUAWd5p+NrMtG3Lv5hnuD8ZL+hZVyRp5RJXfYlr7ivKTmXHT ufFFImIQE8QAMaB+jpKWiwQ7XhsChupjOUuijvo8G+ZySYrsOzx3GtHZJWsi6PnVJs7q KVya3eK+6OCvoBRaxEzY+ZdNx5HI5Ad0zvcrKfclOMIeiqTCDzNeA0rnBNnOnWX+v6s8 XCBSf/mzIR1SP70eLXJtlwxe3/Ntt+cd/bn5HQjDwAhKVpfsqfZjPBluGtg5nVM+lI55 5pJ0OfmDloGmjvx2EDhH9xpDu7y5oZ4BZ2Ebcc3NQq1rAxx0ultQdQcyqtDjMMTIKG90 vqCg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id k193si5511931pge.377.2018.02.13.08.38.24; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 08:38:38 -0800 (PST) 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; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965317AbeBMQgF (ORCPT + 99 others); Tue, 13 Feb 2018 11:36:05 -0500 Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:44786 "EHLO mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965194AbeBMQgE (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Feb 2018 11:36:04 -0500 Received: from localhost (LFbn-1-12258-90.w90-92.abo.wanadoo.fr [90.92.71.90]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 414E81049; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 16:36:03 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2018 17:32:39 +0100 From: Greg Kroah-Hartman To: Nick Lowe Cc: Arjan van de Ven , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org, David Woodhouse , Thomas Gleixner , Borislav Petkov , Dave Hansen , gnomes@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk, ak@linux.intel.com, ashok.raj@intel.com, karahmed@amazon.de, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, peterz@infradead.org, Borislav Petkov , 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 Message-ID: <20180213163239.GA17101@kroah.com> References: <20180209133931.211869118@linuxfoundation.org> <20180209133934.259299920@linuxfoundation.org> <20180213150007.GJ26982@kroah.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.3 (2018-01-21) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 03:27:47PM +0000, Nick Lowe wrote: > Hi Arjan and Greg, > > Sorry if I am not being clear enough. > > My point is that there is a check for X86_VENDOR_AMD now in two places. > > It is still hardcoded for the auto boot option which I think should > not be there. The patch on that basis looked incomplete to me. > > Put another way, there is no effect to the auto option where the > contents of cpu_no_meltdown[] are changed and > cpu_vulnerable_to_meltdown returns differently. > > The auto option does not make use of a determination of the > X86_BUG_CPU_MELTDOWN state. > > This seems wrong to me. It does not seem correct to me for the auto > option to have this duplication with a check for just X86_VENDOR_AMD. Do you have a patch that reflects what you want to see changed here? And can you test it? :) I don't have any AMD hardware, sorry. thanks, greg k-h