From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S934256AbeBLLu6 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Mon, 12 Feb 2018 06:50:58 -0500
Received: from casper.infradead.org ([85.118.1.10]:35568 "EHLO
        casper.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S933898AbeBLLu4 (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Mon, 12 Feb 2018 06:50:56 -0500
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 12:50:02 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: hpa@zytor.com, tglx@linutronix.de, torvalds@linux-foundation.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dwmw@amazon.co.uk,
        linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org, Dave Hansen <dave@sr71.net>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>, Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [tip:x86/pti] x86/speculation: Use IBRS if available before
 calling into firmware
Message-ID: <20180212115002.GI25181@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <1518362359-1005-1-git-send-email-dwmw@amazon.co.uk>
 <tip-670c3e8da87fa4046a55077b1409cf250865a203@git.kernel.org>
 <20180212102211.cdrrqqd4hdw7xu5y@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20180212102211.cdrrqqd4hdw7xu5y@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.2 (2017-12-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 11:22:11AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > +static inline void firmware_restrict_branch_speculation_start(void)
> > +{
> > +	alternative_msr_write(MSR_IA32_SPEC_CTRL, SPEC_CTRL_IBRS,
> > +			      X86_FEATURE_USE_IBRS_FW);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static inline void firmware_restrict_branch_speculation_end(void)
> > +{
> > +	alternative_msr_write(MSR_IA32_SPEC_CTRL, 0,
> > +			      X86_FEATURE_USE_IBRS_FW);
> 
> BTW., there's a detail that only occurred to me today, this enabling/disabling 
> sequence is not NMI safe, and it might be called from NMI context:

Wait, we're doing firmware from NMI? That sounds like a _REALLY_ bad
idea.