From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-path: <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>
Received: from mga03.intel.com ([134.134.136.65])
	by Galois.linutronix.de with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256)
	(Exim 4.80)
	(envelope-from <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>)
	id 1fC9eG-00085g-JU
	for speck@linutronix.de; Fri, 27 Apr 2018 22:07:17 +0200
Subject: [MODERATED] Re: [PATCH v2] Linux Patch 1/1
References: <92c45587-5eb3-2421-6fc1-42e74a715e30@linux.intel.com>
 <alpine.DEB.2.21.1804271712160.2076@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
 <20180427164743.GA14180@pd.tnic>
 <6e2b14fc-3bf6-071d-6ce2-e518f2c4f069@redhat.com>
 <20180427173221.GB14180@pd.tnic>
 <alpine.DEB.2.21.1804271946300.1596@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
 <20180427180944.GD75137@tassilo.jf.intel.com>
 <alpine.DEB.2.21.1804272015590.1596@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
 <alpine.DEB.2.21.1804272019140.1596@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
 <alpine.LFD.2.21.999.1804271122230.11549@i7.lan>
 <85e5e716-bd80-30f5-d4fe-a9bf0601e6d8@linux.intel.com>
 <07ad1696-ef36-27ba-67b9-150f1d33b5e5@redhat.com>
From: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>
Message-ID: <68e32aae-dd85-ec17-e06d-3c96bd83b6fa@linux.intel.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018 13:07:12 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <07ad1696-ef36-27ba-67b9-150f1d33b5e5@redhat.com>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="FOpb1Mpfrmtfjgo8JyggOiXlM2zcbqxH8"; protected-headers="v1"
To: speck@linutronix.de
List-ID: <speck.linutronix.de>

This is an OpenPGP/MIME encrypted message (RFC 4880 and 3156)
--FOpb1Mpfrmtfjgo8JyggOiXlM2zcbqxH8
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="XSk5PaFauQG7No3jcExIXpeGJLW3W8yJj"

--XSk5PaFauQG7No3jcExIXpeGJLW3W8yJj
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On 04/27/2018 12:57 PM, speck for Jon Masters wrote:
> On 04/27/2018 03:26 PM, speck for Tim Chen wrote:
>> On 04/27/2018 11:30 AM, speck for Linus Torvalds wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>=20
>=20
>> I'll keep the option in prctl to turn the mitigation off then till we
>> find a strong reason to do otherwise.
>=20
> Konrad and I are sitting here chatting in my office. We debated the
> enumeration for this. Do we think simply calling and getting an EINVAL
> on older kernels is ok, or do we need a specific enumeration for the
> ability to control SSB from software? An enumeration would be nice. You=

> might want to look to how the kernel handles MPX today to indicate
> whether the prctl implemented, and also whether runtime supported.
>=20
> (he's not got his encrypted email in front of him but he says he'll wor=
k
> in your update to his patch series if you send it out tonight)
>=20

I'll do my best to send an update tonight.

Tim

--XSk5PaFauQG7No3jcExIXpeGJLW3W8yJj--

--FOpb1Mpfrmtfjgo8JyggOiXlM2zcbqxH8--