lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Jan]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] x86/speculation/spectre_v2: Exclude Zhaoxin CPUs from SPECTRE_V2
Date
Tony,

Tony W Wang-oc <TonyWWang-oc@zhaoxin.com> writes:

> @@ -1023,6 +1023,7 @@ static void identify_cpu_without_cpuid(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
> #define MSBDS_ONLY BIT(5)
> #define NO_SWAPGS BIT(6)
> #define NO_ITLB_MULTIHIT BIT(7)
> +#define NO_SPECTRE_V2 BIT(8)
>
> #define VULNWL(_vendor, _family, _model, _whitelist) \
> { X86_VENDOR_##_vendor, _family, _model, X86_FEATURE_ANY, _whitelist }
> @@ -1084,6 +1085,10 @@ static const __initconst struct x86_cpu_id cpu_vuln_whitelist[] = {
> /* FAMILY_ANY must be last, otherwise 0x0f - 0x12 matches won't work */
> VULNWL_AMD(X86_FAMILY_ANY, NO_MELTDOWN | NO_L1TF | NO_MDS | NO_SWAPGS | NO_ITLB_MULTIHIT),
> VULNWL_HYGON(X86_FAMILY_ANY, NO_MELTDOWN | NO_L1TF | NO_MDS | NO_SWAPGS | NO_ITLB_MULTIHIT),
> +
> + /* Zhaoxin Family 7 */
> + VULNWL(CENTAUR, 7, X86_MODEL_ANY, NO_SPECTRE_V2),
> + VULNWL(ZHAOXIN, 7, X86_MODEL_ANY, NO_SPECTRE_V2),
> {}
> };
>
> @@ -1116,7 +1121,9 @@ static void __init cpu_set_bug_bits(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
> return;
>
> setup_force_cpu_bug(X86_BUG_SPECTRE_V1);
> - setup_force_cpu_bug(X86_BUG_SPECTRE_V2);
> +
> + if (!cpu_matches(NO_SPECTRE_V2))
> + setup_force_cpu_bug(X86_BUG_SPECTRE_V2);

That's way better. But as you might have noticed yourself this conflicts
with the other patch which excludes these machines from the SWAPGS bug.

Granted it's a trivial conflict, but maintainers are not there to mop up
the mess others create. So the right thing here is to resend both
patches as a patch series with the conflict properly resolved.

Thanks,

tglx

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-01-16 19:49    [W:0.060 / U:0.752 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site