Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Mon, 18 Jul 2022 18:10:36 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To:     Thadeu Lima de Souza Cascardo <cascardo@canonical.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org,
        x86@kernel.org, ardb@kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de,
        gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org,
        Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@kernel.org>, stable@vger.kernel.org,
        Andrew Cooper <Andrew.Cooper3@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] efi/x86: use naked RET on mixed mode call wrapper
Message-ID: <YtWF/GLXxBNQjkOX@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <20220715194550.793957-1-cascardo@canonical.com>
 <YtVG8VBmFikS6GMn@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <YtVnNnyDjt2vrWiR@quatroqueijos>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <YtVnNnyDjt2vrWiR@quatroqueijos>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Jul 18, 2022 at 10:59:18AM -0300, Thadeu Lima de Souza Cascardo wrote:

> And I think you nailed what I had in mind for using IBPB when doing firmware
> calls, and perhaps this is wanted even when we ignore this naked RET here.
> 
> There is a typo on your patch below, but I will give it a try and see if it
> doesn't blow up on AMD systems without IBPB (by way of emulation).

Yeah, Boris pointed out the same. Typing is hard ;-)