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 23:55:02 +0100 (CET)
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To:     Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
cc:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Linux List Kernel Mailing <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Andrew Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
        Jiri Kosina <jkosina@suse.cz>, thomas.lendacky@amd.com,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>,
        Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
        David Woodhouse <dwmw@amazon.co.uk>,
        Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>, dave.hansen@intel.com,
        Casey Schaufler <casey.schaufler@intel.com>,
        "Mallick, Asit K" <asit.k.mallick@intel.com>,
        "Van De Ven, Arjan" <arjan@linux.intel.com>, jcm@redhat.com,
        longman9394@gmail.com, Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        david.c.stewart@intel.com, Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
        Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 01/24] x86/speculation: Update the TIF_SSBD comment
In-Reply-To: <20181121225336.GE27559@zn.tnic>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1811212354110.1665@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
References: <20181121201430.559770965@linutronix.de> <20181121201722.337599561@linutronix.de> <CAHk-=wgLZkKDLeNN818VG0wC6B_kCUJqKPLdW+KDVocU6_DvtA@mail.gmail.com> <CAHk-=wj6fZpcad+1O5Ou0HZb0NEv1RM_BweyM0XBGtzE87YXXg@mail.gmail.com>
 <alpine.DEB.2.21.1811212345180.1665@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> <20181121225336.GE27559@zn.tnic>
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 Wed, 21 Nov 2018, Borislav Petkov wrote:

> On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 11:48:41PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > Btw, I really do not like the app2app wording. I'd rather go for usr2usr,
> > but that's kinda horrible as well. But then, all of this is horrible.
> > 
> > Any better ideas?
> 
> It needs to have "task isolation" in there somewhere as this is what it
> does, practically. But it needs to be more precise as in "isolates the
> tasks from influence due to shared hardware." :)

Not only shared hardware. IBPB is about tasks running back to back on the
same CPU.

Thanks,

	tglx