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;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1574297603-198156-1-git-send-email-fenghua.yu@intel.com>
 <1574297603-198156-7-git-send-email-fenghua.yu@intel.com> <20191121060444.GA55272@gmail.com>
 <20191121130153.GS4097@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20191121171214.GD12042@gmail.com>
 <20191121173444.GA5581@agluck-desk2.amr.corp.intel.com> <20191122105141.GY4114@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20191122152715.GA1909@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <3908561D78D1C84285E8C5FCA982C28F7F4DD20D@ORSMSX115.amr.corp.intel.com>
 <20191122202345.GC2844@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20191122204204.GA192370@romley-ivt3.sc.intel.com>
In-Reply-To: <20191122204204.GA192370@romley-ivt3.sc.intel.com>
From:   Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
Date:   Fri, 22 Nov 2019 13:25:45 -0800
Message-ID: <CALCETrUBomb2_2xyX-tZUD84smtDWH6e16zSN1qupkv-DWu5kw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 6/6] x86/split_lock: Enable split lock detection by
 kernel parameter
To:     Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        H Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>,
        "Raj, Ashok" <ashok.raj@intel.com>,
        "Shankar, Ravi V" <ravi.v.shankar@intel.com>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, x86 <x86@kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 12:29 PM Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 09:23:45PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 06:02:04PM +0000, Luck, Tony wrote:
> > > > it requires we get the kernel and firmware clean, but only warns about
> > > > dodgy userspace, which I really don't think there is much of.
> > > >
> > > > getting the kernel clean should be pretty simple.
> > >
> > > Fenghua has a half dozen additional patches (I think they were
> > > all posted in previous iterations of the patch) that were found by
> > > code inspection, rather than by actually hitting them.
> >
> > I thought we merged at least some of that, but maybe my recollection is
> > faulty.
>
> At least 2 key fixes are in TIP tree:
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/157384597983.12247.8995835529288193538.tip-bot2@tip-bot2/
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/157384597947.12247.7200239597382357556.tip-bot2@tip-bot2/

I do not like these patches at all.  I would *much* rather see the
bitops fixed and those patches reverted.

Is there any Linux architecture that doesn't have 32-bit atomic
operations?  If all architectures can support them, then we should add
set_bit_u32(), etc and/or make x86's set_bit() work for a
4-byte-aligned pointer.

--Andy