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, 26 Jun 2018 12:02:21 +0100
From:   Alan Cox <gnomes@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc:     Alan Cox <alan@linux.intel.com>, Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@linux.intel.com>,
        Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@intel.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
        Rafael Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
        Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>,
        Ravi V Shankar <ravi.v.shankar@intel.com>,
        Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, x86 <x86@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 06/16] x86/split_lock: Save #AC setting for split
 lock in firmware in boot time and restore the setting in reboot
Message-ID: <20180626120221.7fbd0eff@alans-desktop>
In-Reply-To: <20180626090521.GF2494@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <1527435965-202085-1-git-send-email-fenghua.yu@intel.com>
        <1527435965-202085-7-git-send-email-fenghua.yu@intel.com>
        <20180621195823.GD13636@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
        <1529680267.4364.50.camel@linux.intel.com>
        <20180626090521.GF2494@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Organization: Intel Corporation
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, 26 Jun 2018 11:05:21 +0200
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:

> On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 04:11:07PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> > On Thu, 2018-06-21 at 21:58 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:  
> > > On Sun, May 27, 2018 at 08:45:55AM -0700, Fenghua Yu wrote:  
> > > > Firmware may contain split locked instructions.  
> > > 
> > > I think that's the wrong attitude. You should mandate in your BIOS
> > > development guide that Firmware _MUST_NOT_ contain unaligned LOCK
> > > prefixed instructions.
> > >   
> > 
> > In the longer term I would agree entirely with that sentiment.  
> 
> But then how do we deal with SMIs ?

On a system doing that level of real time you don't do SMIs.

I think Thomas comment that this shouldn't be in a production kernel
because the firmware people need to have their house in order before that
is a fair one.

(and I've already been poking people to make sure this is documented
properly as a requirement)

Alan