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;
Sender: Ingo Molnar <mingo.kernel.org@gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 2 Aug 2022 12:51:59 +0200
From:   Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To:     Chenyi Qiang <chenyi.qiang@intel.com>
Cc:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
        Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>,
        Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RESEND] x86/bus_lock: Don't assume the init value of
 DEBUGCTLMSR.BUS_LOCK_DETECT to be zero
Message-ID: <YukBz6t1n3aMbznT@gmail.com>
References: <20220802033206.21333-1-chenyi.qiang@intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20220802033206.21333-1-chenyi.qiang@intel.com>
Precedence: bulk


* Chenyi Qiang <chenyi.qiang@intel.com> wrote:

> It's possible that BIOS/firmware has set DEBUGCTLMSR_BUS_LOCK_DETECT, or
> this kernel has been kexec'd from a kernel that enabled bus lock
> detection.
> 
> Disable bus lock detection explicitly if not wanted.

Makes sense.

Just curious: in what circumstances does the BIOS/firmware set 
DEBUGCTLMSR_BUS_LOCK_DETECT? Does it use it, or does it enable it for some 
spurious reason, without really using the feature? (Assuming you are aware 
of instances where this happened - or was this simply a hypothetical?)

Thanks,

	Ingo