From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.linutronix.de (146.0.238.70:993) by crypto-ml.lab.linutronix.de with IMAP4-SSL for ; 09 Jul 2018 11:47:52 -0000 Received: from mail-wr1-x42c.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::42c]) by Galois.linutronix.de with esmtps (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1fcUdy-0007PS-Nw for speck@linutronix.de; Mon, 09 Jul 2018 13:47:51 +0200 Received: by mail-wr1-x42c.google.com with SMTP id s11-v6so10657921wra.13 for ; Mon, 09 Jul 2018 04:47:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gmail.com (2E8B0CD5.catv.pool.telekom.hu. [46.139.12.213]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id h12-v6sm11689240wmb.3.2018.07.09.04.47.44 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Mon, 09 Jul 2018 04:47:44 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Ingo Molnar Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2018 13:47:42 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar Subject: [MODERATED] Re: [patch 2/2] Command line and documentation 2 Message-ID: <20180709114742.GA27240@gmail.com> References: <20180708125216.197406530@linutronix.de> <20180708125654.812951995@linutronix.de> <20180709110432.GB26055@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: speck@linutronix.de List-ID: * speck for Jiri Kosina wrote: > On Mon, 9 Jul 2018, speck for Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > + novirt,nowarn: Same as 'novirt', but hypervisors will not warn when > > > + a VM is started in a potentially insecure configuration. > > > + > > > +The default is 'novirt'. > > > > Isn't the default 'novirt,nowarn'? > > No, the default absolutely is 'novirt' Indeed - I just mis-remembered it: "novirt,nowarn" is the last entry in the values, not the default. > > /* Default mitigation for L1TF-affected CPUs */ > enum l1tf_mitigations l1tf_mitigation __ro_after_init = L1TF_MITIGATION_NOVIRT; > > I don't think making default 'novirt,nowarn' would make any sense really. > It's uncomfortable enough that the kernel is by default not turning the > protection on. > > If it wouldn't be even issuing a warning, that'd be rather bad. Yeah, agreed. Thanks, Ingo