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:   Thu, 23 Aug 2018 12:38:33 -0700
From:   Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>
To:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc:     Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, x86@kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>, stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/speculation/l1tf: suggest what to do on systems with
 too much RAM
Message-ID: <20180823193833.GE12066@tassilo.jf.intel.com>
References: <20180823134418.17008-1-vbabka@suse.cz>
 <20180823142812.7363-1-vbabka@suse.cz>
 <20180823154648.GD12066@tassilo.jf.intel.com>
 <20180823192547.GS29735@dhcp22.suse.cz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20180823192547.GS29735@dhcp22.suse.cz>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

> There are people who care about L1TF mitigations. I am not going to
> question their motivation. In any case a hint how to make the mitigation
> active again sounds more useful than something that sounds as scary as
> "you are vulnerable".

FWIW an early version of these patches automatically limited the available
memory, but Linus pointed out that people likely prefer their memory.
I still think his reasoning was right, and likely applies to your
message too.

-Andi