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:   Wed, 21 Nov 2018 19:15:13 +0100
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To:     Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>
Cc:     Jiri Kosina <jikos@kernel.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        stable@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>,
        Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
        WoodhouseDavid <dwmw@amazon.co.uk>,
        Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
        SchauflerCasey <casey.schaufler@intel.com>,
        Dave Stewart <david.c.stewart@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.19 041/361] x86/speculation: Enable cross-hyperthread
 spectre v2 STIBP mitigation
Message-ID: <20181121181513.GA30870@kroah.com>
References: <20181111221619.915519183@linuxfoundation.org>
 <20181111221625.598298393@linuxfoundation.org>
 <alpine.LRH.2.00.1811211420130.18805@gjva.wvxbf.pm>
 <20181121135611.GA26411@kroah.com>
 <41234d20-294f-d0f4-336c-64bf9fcb92a7@linux.intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <41234d20-294f-d0f4-336c-64bf9fcb92a7@linux.intel.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 09:47:48AM -0800, Tim Chen wrote:
> On 11/21/2018 05:56 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 02:21:15PM +0100, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> >> On Sun, 11 Nov 2018, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> >>
> >>> 4.19-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
> >>
> >> Greg, please drop this patch from all -stable for now. Version that 
> >> wouldn't have such performance impact is being worked on.
> > 
> > Is it reverted in Linus's tree?  If not, then anything that comes "later
> > on" will not apply here, right?
> > 
> > I see the thread asking about this, but I got really conflicting
> > messages here, and now it's in all of the latest releases, and no
> > testing seems to have uncovered issues.  Is it just a "slow down"
> > problem?
> 
> Greg,
> 
> It could be a big slow down in excess of 20% for some applications.
> And cross sibling Spectre v2 attack is quite hard to pull off.
> 
> So till we have the accompanying patchset that only apply STIBP on processes
> that really need it instead of universally, it should be withheld from
> stable.

Ok, now reverted, thanks.

greg k-h