From: Nikolay Borisov <nik.borisov@suse.com>
To: Pawan Gupta <pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com>
Cc: x86@kernel.org, David Kaplan <david.kaplan@amd.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@kernel.org>,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
Asit Mallick <asit.k.mallick@intel.com>,
Tao Zhang <tao1.zhang@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 06/11] x86/vmscape: Move mitigation selection to a switch()
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2025 12:19:32 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <c1b67fb1-0ef9-4f23-9e09-c5eecc18f595@suse.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251124230917.7wxvux5s6j6f5tuz@desk>
On 11/25/25 01:09, Pawan Gupta wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 21, 2025 at 04:27:05PM +0200, Nikolay Borisov wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 11/20/25 08:19, Pawan Gupta wrote:
>>> This ensures that all mitigation modes are explicitly handled, while
>>> keeping the mitigation selection for each mode together. This also prepares
>>> for adding BHB-clearing mitigation mode for VMSCAPE.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Pawan Gupta <pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com>
>>> ---
>>> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bugs.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++----
>>> 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bugs.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bugs.c
>>> index 1e9b11198db0fe2483bd17b1327bcfd44a2c1dbf..233594ede19bf971c999f4d3cc0f6f213002c16c 100644
>>> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bugs.c
>>> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bugs.c
>>> @@ -3231,17 +3231,31 @@ early_param("vmscape", vmscape_parse_cmdline);
>>> static void __init vmscape_select_mitigation(void)
>>> {
>>> - if (!boot_cpu_has_bug(X86_BUG_VMSCAPE) ||
>>> - !boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_IBPB)) {
>>> + if (!boot_cpu_has_bug(X86_BUG_VMSCAPE)) {
>>> vmscape_mitigation = VMSCAPE_MITIGATION_NONE;
>>> return;
>>> }
>>> - if (vmscape_mitigation == VMSCAPE_MITIGATION_AUTO) {
>>> - if (should_mitigate_vuln(X86_BUG_VMSCAPE))
>>> + if ((vmscape_mitigation == VMSCAPE_MITIGATION_AUTO) &&
>>> + !should_mitigate_vuln(X86_BUG_VMSCAPE))
>>> + vmscape_mitigation = VMSCAPE_MITIGATION_NONE;
>>> +
>>> + switch (vmscape_mitigation) {
>>> + case VMSCAPE_MITIGATION_NONE:
>>> + break;
>>> +
>>> + case VMSCAPE_MITIGATION_IBPB_ON_VMEXIT:
>>> + case VMSCAPE_MITIGATION_IBPB_EXIT_TO_USER:
>>> + if (!boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_IBPB))
>>> + vmscape_mitigation = VMSCAPE_MITIGATION_NONE;
>>> + break;
>>> +
>>> + case VMSCAPE_MITIGATION_AUTO:
>>> + if (boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_IBPB))
>>> vmscape_mitigation = VMSCAPE_MITIGATION_IBPB_EXIT_TO_USER;
>>
>>
>> IMO this patch is a net-negative because as per my reply to patch 9 you have
>> effectively a dead branch:
>>
>> The clear BHB_CLEAR_USER one, however it turns out you have yet another one:
>> VMSCAPE_MITIGATION_IBPB_ON_VMEXIT as it's only ever set in
>> vmscape_update_mitigation() which executes after '_select()' as well and
>
> Removed VMSCAPE_MITIGATION_IBPB_ON_VMEXIT.
>
>> additionally you duplicate the FEATURE_IBPB check.
>
> FEATURE_IBPB check is still needed for VMSCAPE_MITIGATION_IBPB_EXIT_TO_USER.
> I don't think we can drop that.
But if X86_FEATURE_IBPB is not present then all branches boil down to
setting the mitigation to NONE. What I was suggesting is to not remove
the that check at the top.
>
>> So I think either dropping it or removing the superfluous branches is in
>> order.
>>
>>> else
>>> vmscape_mitigation = VMSCAPE_MITIGATION_NONE;
>>> + break;
>>> }
>>> }
>>>
>>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-11-25 10:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 63+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-11-20 6:17 [PATCH v4 00/11] VMSCAPE optimization for BHI variant Pawan Gupta
2025-11-20 6:17 ` [PATCH v4 01/11] x86/bhi: x86/vmscape: Move LFENCE out of clear_bhb_loop() Pawan Gupta
2025-11-20 16:15 ` Nikolay Borisov
2025-11-20 16:56 ` Pawan Gupta
2025-11-20 16:58 ` Nikolay Borisov
2025-11-20 6:18 ` [PATCH v4 02/11] x86/bhi: Move the BHB sequence to a macro for reuse Pawan Gupta
2025-11-20 16:28 ` Nikolay Borisov
2025-11-20 16:57 ` Pawan Gupta
2025-11-25 0:21 ` Pawan Gupta
2025-11-20 6:18 ` [PATCH v4 03/11] x86/bhi: Make the depth of BHB-clearing configurable Pawan Gupta
2025-11-20 17:02 ` Nikolay Borisov
2025-11-20 6:18 ` [PATCH v4 04/11] x86/bhi: Make clear_bhb_loop() effective on newer CPUs Pawan Gupta
2025-11-21 12:33 ` Nikolay Borisov
2025-11-21 16:40 ` Dave Hansen
2025-11-21 16:45 ` Nikolay Borisov
2025-11-21 16:50 ` Dave Hansen
2025-11-21 18:16 ` Pawan Gupta
2025-11-21 18:42 ` Dave Hansen
2025-11-21 21:26 ` Pawan Gupta
2025-11-21 21:36 ` Dave Hansen
2025-11-24 19:21 ` Pawan Gupta
2025-11-22 11:05 ` david laight
2025-11-24 19:31 ` Pawan Gupta
2025-11-25 11:34 ` david laight
2025-12-04 1:40 ` Pawan Gupta
2025-12-04 9:15 ` david laight
2025-12-04 21:56 ` Pawan Gupta
2025-12-05 9:21 ` david laight
2025-11-26 19:23 ` Pawan Gupta
2026-03-06 21:00 ` Jim Mattson
2026-03-06 22:32 ` Pawan Gupta
2026-03-06 22:57 ` Jim Mattson
2026-03-06 23:29 ` Pawan Gupta
2026-03-07 0:35 ` Jim Mattson
2026-03-07 1:00 ` Pawan Gupta
2026-03-07 1:10 ` Jim Mattson
2026-03-07 2:41 ` Pawan Gupta
2026-03-07 5:05 ` Jim Mattson
2026-03-09 22:29 ` Pawan Gupta
2026-03-09 23:05 ` Jim Mattson
2026-03-10 0:00 ` Pawan Gupta
2026-03-10 0:08 ` Jim Mattson
2026-03-10 0:52 ` Pawan Gupta
2025-11-20 6:18 ` [PATCH v4 05/11] x86/vmscape: Rename x86_ibpb_exit_to_user to x86_predictor_flush_exit_to_user Pawan Gupta
2025-11-20 6:19 ` [PATCH v4 06/11] x86/vmscape: Move mitigation selection to a switch() Pawan Gupta
2025-11-21 14:27 ` Nikolay Borisov
2025-11-24 23:09 ` Pawan Gupta
2025-11-25 10:19 ` Nikolay Borisov [this message]
2025-11-25 17:45 ` Pawan Gupta
2025-11-20 6:19 ` [PATCH v4 07/11] x86/vmscape: Use write_ibpb() instead of indirect_branch_prediction_barrier() Pawan Gupta
2025-11-21 12:59 ` Nikolay Borisov
2025-11-20 6:19 ` [PATCH v4 08/11] x86/vmscape: Use static_call() for predictor flush Pawan Gupta
2025-11-20 6:19 ` [PATCH v4 09/11] x86/vmscape: Deploy BHB clearing mitigation Pawan Gupta
2025-11-21 14:18 ` Nikolay Borisov
2025-11-21 18:29 ` Pawan Gupta
2025-11-21 14:23 ` Nikolay Borisov
2025-11-21 18:41 ` Pawan Gupta
2025-11-21 18:53 ` Nikolay Borisov
2025-11-21 21:29 ` Pawan Gupta
2025-11-20 6:20 ` [PATCH v4 10/11] x86/vmscape: Override conflicting attack-vector controls with =force Pawan Gupta
2025-11-21 18:04 ` Nikolay Borisov
2025-11-20 6:20 ` [PATCH v4 11/11] x86/vmscape: Add cmdline vmscape=on to override attack vector controls Pawan Gupta
2025-11-25 11:41 ` Nikolay Borisov
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=c1b67fb1-0ef9-4f23-9e09-c5eecc18f595@suse.com \
--to=nik.borisov@suse.com \
--cc=asit.k.mallick@intel.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=david.kaplan@amd.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jpoimboe@kernel.org \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=tao1.zhang@intel.com \
--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®