From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.linutronix.de (193.142.43.55:993) by crypto-ml.lab.linutronix.de with IMAP4-SSL for ; 01 Nov 2019 14:33:57 -0000 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]) by Galois.linutronix.de with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1iQXzv-0001XR-Us for speck@linutronix.de; Fri, 01 Nov 2019 15:33:56 +0100 Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2019 15:33:45 +0100 From: Greg KH Subject: [MODERATED] Re: [PATCH 3/9] TAA 3 Message-ID: <20191101143345.GA2821960@kroah.com> References: <580e02757c3e639bff00fcea830aa46eba46a92f.1571905227.git.bp@suse.de> <20191030132858.GA703436@kroah.com> <20191030172402.GB9730@guptapadev.amr> <20191030192758.GD709410@kroah.com> <20191030194440.GP31513@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20191101093526.GA2758611@kroah.com> <20191101131548.GB32677@nazgul.tnic> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20191101131548.GB32677@nazgul.tnic> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: speck@linutronix.de List-ID: On Fri, Nov 01, 2019 at 02:15:48PM +0100, speck for Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Fri, Nov 01, 2019 at 10:35:26AM +0100, speck for Greg KH wrote: > > Anyway, yes, TM shoudl have the same semantic. But, if it's too late at > > the moment, we can always unify this later on if PPC really wants it. > > We can s/unify/add additional/ to minimize confusion. What I mean is, > we can add "tm=" as an additional option which coexists with the "tsx=" > option on x86 because the patches would have released already and we > would have communicated "tsx=" to people by then. So "tsx=" and "tm=" > would do the same thing on x86. Ah, yes, that sounds like a sane plan. thanks, greg k-h