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, 19 Feb 2020 09:21:15 -0500
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc:     Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>, x86-ml <x86@kernel.org>,
        lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] #MC mess
Message-ID: <20200219092115.3b3cccd9@gandalf.local.home>
In-Reply-To: <20200219081541.GG14914@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <20200218173150.GK14449@zn.tnic>
        <CALCETrXbitwGKcEbCF84y0aEGz+B4LL_bj-_njgyXBJA74abOA@mail.gmail.com>
        <20200219081541.GG14914@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
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 Wed, 19 Feb 2020 09:15:41 +0100
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:

> > 
> > Tony, etc, can you ask your Intel contacts who care about this kind of
> > thing to stop twiddling their thumbs and FIX IT?  The easy fix is
> > utterly trivial.  Add a new instruction IRET_NON_NMI.  It does
> > *exactly* the same thing as IRET except that it does not unmask NMIs.
> > (It also doesn't unmask NMIs if it faults.)  No fancy design work.
> > Future improvements can still happen on top of this.  
> 
> Yes please! Of course, we're stuck with the existing NMI entry crap
> forever because legacy, but it would make all things NMI so much saner.

What would be nice is to have a NMI_IRET, that is defined as something
that wont break legacy CPUs. Where it could be just a nop iret, or maybe
if possible a "lock iret"? That is, not have a IRET_NON_NMI, as that
would be all over the place, but just the iret for NMI itself. As
that's in one place.

-- Steve