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;
From:   Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>
To:     Breno Leitao <leitao@debian.org>
Cc:     pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com, jpoimboe@kernel.org,
        peterz@infradead.org, tglx@linutronix.de, bp@alien8.de,
        leit@fb.com, hpa@zytor.com, x86@kernel.org, mingo@redhat.com,
        dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] x86/bugs: Break down mitigations configurations
References: <20230615164417.3588162-1-leitao@debian.org>
Date:   Thu, 15 Jun 2023 10:21:55 -0700
In-Reply-To: <20230615164417.3588162-1-leitao@debian.org> (Breno Leitao's
        message of "Thu, 15 Jun 2023 09:44:11 -0700")
Message-ID: <87352shc98.fsf@linux.intel.com>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.2 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Precedence: bulk

Breno Leitao <leitao@debian.org> writes:

> There is no way to compile a kernel today with some of the speculative
> mitigations disabled. Even if the kernel has
> CONFIG_SPECULATION_MITIGATIONS=n, some Intel mitigations, such as MDS, TAA,
> MMIO are still enabled and can only be disabled using a kernel parameter.
>
> This patchset creates a way to choose what to enable or disable, and,
> get the mitigations disable if CONFIG_SPECULATION_MITIGATIONS is not
> set, as the rest of other mitigations.
>
> Also, we want to print a warning message letting users know that these
> mitigations are disabled.
>
> This is a follow up to this discussion: https://lkml.org/lkml/2023/6/12/798
>

Isn't this all roughly equivalent to CONFIG_CMDLINE="mitigations=..." ?

-Andi