From: Daniel Sneddon <daniel.sneddon@linux.intel.com>
To: Nikolay Borisov <nik.borisov@suse.com>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
x86@kernel.org
Cc: hpa@zytor.com, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86/bugs: Check VERW mitigations for consistency
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2024 09:34:58 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <01b20580-9dd7-460b-aab1-86ad153fb3a7@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <35c07733-d9e4-43a3-9dde-2cc10cd1ab9f@suse.com>
On 10/29/24 09:32, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
>
>
> On 29.10.24 г. 1:50 ч., Daniel Sneddon wrote:
>> There are currently 4 mitigations that use VERW: MDS, TAA,
>> MMIO Stale Data, and Register File Data Sampling. Because
>> all 4 use the same mitigation path, if any one of them is
>> enabled, they're all enabled. Normally, this is what is
>> wanted. However, if a user wants to disable the mitigation,
>> this can cause problems. If the user misses disabling even
>> one of these mitigations, then none of them will be
>> disabled. This can cause confusion as the user expects to
>> regain the performance lost to the mitigation but isn't
>> seeing any improvement. Since there are already 4 knobs for
>> controlling it, adding a 5th knob that controls all 4
>> mitigations together would just overcomplicate things.
>> Instead, let the user know their mitigations are out of sync
>> when at least one of these mitigations is disabled but not
>> all 4.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Daniel Sneddon <daniel.sneddon@linux.intel.com>
>> ---
>> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bugs.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bugs.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bugs.c
>> index d1915427b4ff..b26b3b554330 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bugs.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bugs.c
>> @@ -582,8 +582,26 @@ static void __init md_clear_update_mitigation(void)
>> pr_info("Register File Data Sampling: %s\n", rfds_strings[rfds_mitigation]);
>> }
>>
>> +static void __init verw_mitigations_check(void)
>> +{
>> + if (mds_mitigation == MDS_MITIGATION_OFF ||
>> + taa_mitigation == TAA_MITIGATION_OFF ||
>> + mmio_mitigation == MMIO_MITIGATION_OFF ||
>> + rfds_mitigation == RFDS_MITIGATION_OFF) {
>> + if (mds_mitigation == MDS_MITIGATION_OFF &&
>> + taa_mitigation == TAA_MITIGATION_OFF &&
>> + mmio_mitigation == MMIO_MITIGATION_OFF &&
>> + rfds_mitigation == RFDS_MITIGATION_OFF)
>> + return;
>
> Ugh, why don't you simply XOR the 4 values and if it's 1 it means the
> inputs differe => there is inconsistency.
>
That's certainly cleaner. Will update.
Thx
>> +
>> + pr_info("MDS, TAA, MMIO Stale Data, and Register File Data Sampling all depend on VERW\n");
>> + pr_info("In order to disable any one of them please ensure all 4 are disabled.\n");
>> + }
>> +}
>> +
>> static void __init md_clear_select_mitigation(void)
>> {
>> + verw_mitigations_check();
>> mds_select_mitigation();
>> taa_select_mitigation();
>> mmio_select_mitigation();
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-10-29 16:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-10-28 23:50 [PATCH 0/2] VERW based clean-up Daniel Sneddon
2024-10-28 23:50 ` [PATCH 1/2] x86/bugs: Check VERW mitigations for consistency Daniel Sneddon
2024-10-29 11:39 ` Borislav Petkov
2024-10-29 14:35 ` Daniel Sneddon
2024-10-29 16:32 ` Nikolay Borisov
2024-10-29 16:34 ` Daniel Sneddon [this message]
2024-10-28 23:50 ` [PATCH 2/2] x86/bugs: Clean-up verw mitigations Daniel Sneddon
2024-10-29 11:37 ` Borislav Petkov
2024-10-29 14:40 ` Daniel Sneddon
2024-10-29 15:00 ` Borislav Petkov
2024-10-29 15:33 ` Daniel Sneddon
2024-10-29 16:37 ` Borislav Petkov
2024-10-29 16:39 ` Daniel Sneddon
2024-10-28 23:53 ` [PATCH 0/2] VERW based clean-up Daniel Sneddon
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=01b20580-9dd7-460b-aab1-86ad153fb3a7@linux.intel.com \
--to=daniel.sneddon@linux.intel.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jpoimboe@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=nik.borisov@suse.com \
--cc=pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®