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:   Thu, 13 May 2021 11:06:14 +1000
From:   Balbir Singh <bsingharora@gmail.com>
To:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc:     Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
        "mingo@redhat.com" <mingo@redhat.com>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "peterz@infradead.org" <peterz@infradead.org>,
        "torvalds@linux-foundation.org" <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        "jpoimboe@redhat.com" <jpoimboe@redhat.com>,
        "x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
        "tony.luck@intel.com" <tony.luck@intel.com>,
        "dave.hansen@intel.com" <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
        "thomas.lendacky@amd.com" <thomas.lendacky@amd.com>,
        "benh@kernel.crashing.org" <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
        linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/5] Next revision of the L1D flush patches
Message-ID: <20210513010614.GH4236@balbir-desktop>
References: <20210108121056.21940-1-sblbir@amazon.com>
 <cf89f0389379daaaff0cbce9c5f1550866e55e91.camel@amazon.com>
 <202104081319.DAB1D817@keescook>
 <87y2d5tpjh.ffs@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
 <87tunsofan.ffs@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <87tunsofan.ffs@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Apr 27, 2021 at 12:24:16AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 26 2021 at 10:31, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 08 2021 at 13:23, Kees Cook wrote:
> >>
> >> I'd still really like to see this -- it's a big hammer, but that's the
> >> point for cases where some new flaw appears and we can point to the
> >> toolbox and say "you can mitigate it with this while you wait for new
> >> kernel/CPU."
> >>
> >> Any further thoughts from x86 maintainers? This seems like it addressed
> >> all of tglx's review comments.
> >
> > Sorry for dropping the ball on this. It's in my list of things to deal
> > with. Starting to look at it now.
> 
> So I went through the pile and for remorse I sat down and made the
> tweaks I think are necessary myself.
> 
> I've pushed out the result to
> 
>   git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tglx/devel.git x86/l1dflush
>

Thank you I'll take a look and test it.
 
> The only thing I did not address yet is that the documentation lacks any
> mentioning of the SIGBUS mechanism which is invoked when a task which
> asked for L1D flush protection ends up on a SMT sibling for whatever
> reason. That's essential to have because it's part of the contract of
> that prctl.

IIRC I documented it, I'll double check.

> 
> Balbir, can you please double check the result and prepare an updated
> version from there?
> 
> If you don't have cycles, please let me know.
>

I might have some cycles for testing and re-review. Thanks for all the
hard work on this

Balbir Singh.