Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.36 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.36;
Date:   Wed, 11 Oct 2023 05:20:59 -0700
From:   Breno Leitao <leitao@debian.org>
To:     Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@kernel.org>
Cc:     tglx@linutronix.de, bp@alien8.de, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>, x86@kernel.org,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Pawan Gupta <pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com>, leit@meta.com,
        "open list:X86 ARCHITECTURE (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)" 
        <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] x86/bugs: Add a separate config for each mitigation
Message-ID: <ZSaTK5HOuCabHoEb@gmail.com>
References: <20231010103028.4192223-1-leitao@debian.org>
 <20231011044252.42bplzjsam3qsasz@treble>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20231011044252.42bplzjsam3qsasz@treble>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 09:42:52PM -0700, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 03:30:27AM -0700, Breno Leitao wrote:
> > +config MITIGATE_MDS
> > +	bool "Mitigate Microarchitectural Data Sampling (MDS) hardware bug"
> > +	depends on CPU_SUP_INTEL
> > +	default y
> > +	help
> > +	  Enable mitigation for Microarchitectural Data Sampling (MDS). MDS is
> > +	  a hardware vulnerability which allows unprivileged speculative access
> > +	  to data which is available in various CPU internal buffer. Deeper
> > +	  technical information is available in the MDS specific x86 architecture
> > +	  section: Documentation/arch/x86/mds.rst.
> 
> MITIGATE_GDS seems to be missing?

GDS is named `GDS_FORCE_MITIGATION` instead of  MITIGATE_GDS. See
11cf22869ea ("x86/speculation: Add Kconfig option for GDS")
>
> For consistency I'm thinking it would be better to call them
> MITIGATION_* rather than MITIGATE_* since they're under the
> SPECULATION_MITIGATIONS menuentry, and the bugs code almost exclusively
> uses the noun "mitigation" rather than the verb "mitigate".

Sure. I can definitely rename them to MITIGATION_. Let's see if no one
else disagree and I will update the patch.


> While we're at it should we go ahead and rename the existing options?

Sure!

Thanks for the feedback!