Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Wed, 29 Jul 2020 22:09:06 +0200
From:   peterz@infradead.org
To:     Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>
Cc:     Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        "Shanbhogue, Vedvyas" <vedvyas.shanbhogue@intel.com>,
        "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>, H Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
        "Shankar, Ravi V" <ravi.v.shankar@intel.com>,
        "Li, Xiaoyao" <xiaoyao.li@intel.com>, x86 <x86@kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] x86/bus_lock: Enable bus lock detection
Message-ID: <20200729200906.GC2655@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <1595021700-68460-1-git-send-email-fenghua.yu@intel.com>
 <20200729030232.GE5583@linux.intel.com>
 <e23b04a2adc54a5dbca48271987de822@intel.com>
 <20200729184614.GI27751@linux.intel.com>
 <20200729194259.GA318576@otcwcpicx6.sc.intel.com>
 <20200729200033.GJ27751@linux.intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20200729200033.GJ27751@linux.intel.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 01:00:33PM -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> Why do they need to be exclusive?  We've already established that BLD catches
> things that SLD does not.  What's wrong with running sld=fatal and bld=ratelimit
> so that split locks never happen and kill applications, and non-WB locks are
> are ratelimited?

It's all moot until there's a sane proposal for #DB that isn't utterly
wrecked.