Received: by 2002:a25:6193:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id v141csp2173343ybb; Thu, 2 Apr 2020 14:46:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypIzKa6m4wpn3OR5y7ajPOo/jgRoVx3oG0plPORkCtBpnZoYL9B00yNj1UcqsnKGCJWsXLBS X-Received: by 2002:aca:c552:: with SMTP id v79mr841314oif.156.1585863978892; Thu, 02 Apr 2020 14:46:18 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1585863978; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=M0Tb+Ts45LUC8WUFsYTMpNmBR73meT/Avm+tZAfEUqVIYukVRU7ZPEtjG3Wcnd5uqH p8u6ByFSo/xPOHyX9iE6+pMJitwLWO866E+q4mAUsBwwTePauVN/U6I58YiIS9YjJRtZ 5W1VDP6QqmQgYusWu4HwxQEV3wRRYy6ud4AC2EBHUfsae2Mz/olrFj16VsAlVb/vtpnB QXJ1RhNBjKeR8t00u8e/1PpQxRT4akmk69ned7BI7lYdlTLJ5buIWY1XySyEEFZhMWZB NDB5J7P3PN3jMtLpveGDRkOShqYxccJAj11SW02l3erOBF3kQTRxqdKWv0fGq72BD8Hj lW4g== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:mime-version:message-id:date:references :in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from; bh=w7DG7MMTdK4XTTw/ROjt0X1sAEOwpZnvZMuHVN/xOXs=; b=0zt171xAdWuMAtnK+t0n1Dudhi4fo+Vscnxc7lWjykWKZy9vBzCSn0d/jvPeJt/0X3 r7OyY2ChXTenQ34vh79Sl4vaX7i0WYWNUSHT+afj15fSyoRIolNeTLTTCeuqE6M3rPTo RFUWrMH/mFC/0cxL5uqCoM02gUH2uwOhHuu5bs1UjxBnvgfwH+2QnVMUfvvL9ipptYL/ DxG6uXs2j4NCocMt2izNgYeSzN4WfgV/pZWvsjNEBT5Tkhv1utka+rHUmsRqYCBYJsdn Wq/qIGsKzaNhQtG4PFSsL3y6lC/iC7hVlm6MDRYMDwpgBzwOnU3cECZFziU9eDT1PXlG JuMw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id r21si2818769otp.320.2020.04.02.14.46.05; Thu, 02 Apr 2020 14:46:18 -0700 (PDT) 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; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2388975AbgDBVpN (ORCPT + 99 others); Thu, 2 Apr 2020 17:45:13 -0400 Received: from Galois.linutronix.de ([193.142.43.55]:39068 "EHLO Galois.linutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2388008AbgDBVpN (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Apr 2020 17:45:13 -0400 Received: from p5de0bf0b.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([93.224.191.11] helo=nanos.tec.linutronix.de) by Galois.linutronix.de with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1jK7e2-0003jo-Ii; Thu, 02 Apr 2020 23:45:02 +0200 Received: by nanos.tec.linutronix.de (Postfix, from userid 1000) id B3201100D52; Thu, 2 Apr 2020 23:45:01 +0200 (CEST) From: Thomas Gleixner To: Josh Poimboeuf , "Singh\, Balbir" Cc: "linux-kernel\@vger.kernel.org" , "tony.luck\@intel.com" , "keescook\@chromium.org" , "benh\@kernel.crashing.org" , "x86\@kernel.org" , "dave.hansen\@intel.com" Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] arch/x86: Optionally flush L1D on context switch In-Reply-To: <20200402204749.33ulub5jx66dktxg@treble> References: <20200402062401.29856-1-sblbir@amazon.com> <20200402201328.zqnxwaetpk4ubg56@treble> <31c9720eff18ce167378e9a0017dcd73e0552164.camel@amazon.com> <20200402204749.33ulub5jx66dktxg@treble> Date: Thu, 02 Apr 2020 23:45:01 +0200 Message-ID: <875zehmujm.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Linutronix-Spam-Score: -1.0 X-Linutronix-Spam-Level: - X-Linutronix-Spam-Status: No , -1.0 points, 5.0 required, ALL_TRUSTED=-1,SHORTCIRCUIT=-0.0001 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Josh Poimboeuf writes: > On Thu, Apr 02, 2020 at 08:35:46PM +0000, Singh, Balbir wrote: >> Yes, that CVE the motivation, the mitigation for CVE-2020-0550 does suggest >> flushing the cache on context switch. But in general, as we begin to find more >> ways of evicting data or snopping data, a generic mechanism is more useful and >> that is why I am making it an opt-in. > > Ok. I think it would be a good idea to expand on that justification > more precisely in the commit message. That would help both reviewers of > the code and users of the new option understand what level of paranoia > they're opting in to :-) The commit message is mostly useful for reviewers and people who have to do code archeaology. Documentation/admin-guide/hw-vuln/ has plenty of space to host a document with explanations. paranoia.rst comes to my mind. :) Thanks, tglx