From: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@kernel.org>
To: KP Singh <kpsingh@kernel.org>
Cc: "Borislav Petkov" <bp@alien8.de>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, pjt@google.com, evn@google.com,
tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com,
dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, x86@kernel.org, hpa@zytor.com,
peterz@infradead.org, pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com,
kim.phillips@amd.com, alexandre.chartre@oracle.com,
daniel.sneddon@linux.intel.com,
"José Oliveira" <joseloliveira11@gmail.com>,
"Rodrigo Branco" <rodrigo@kernelhacking.com>,
"Alexandra Sandulescu" <aesa@google.com>,
"Jim Mattson" <jmattson@google.com>,
stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/bugs: Allow STIBP with IBRS
Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2023 11:19:38 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230220191938.hti3ktgh4idzx7iu@treble> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CACYkzJ6p0+bTjbAyv6PD+ZKyyfjM9NyvtuMB-vwNHkeWm72B7A@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, Feb 20, 2023 at 11:04:56AM -0800, KP Singh wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 20, 2023 at 11:00 AM Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 20, 2023 at 10:33:56AM -0800, KP Singh wrote:
> > > static char *stibp_state(void)
> > > {
> > > - if (spectre_v2_in_ibrs_mode(spectre_v2_enabled))
> > > + if (!spectre_v2_user_needs_stibp(spectre_v2_enabled))
> > > return "";
> > >
> > > switch (spectre_v2_user_stibp) {
> > >
> > > Also Josh, is it okay for us to have a discussion and have me write
> > > the patch as a v2? Your current patch does not even credit me at all.
> > > Seems a bit unfair, but I don't really care. I was going to rev up the
> > > patch with your suggestions.
> >
> > Well, frankly the patch needed a complete rewrite. The patch
> > description was unclear about what the problem is and what's being
>
> Josh, this is a complex issue, we are figuring it out together on the
> list. It's complex, that's why folks got it wrong in the first place.
> Calling the patch obtuse and unclear is unfair!
>
> > fixed. The code was obtuse and the comments didn't help. I could tell
> > by the other replies that I wasn't the only one confused.
>
> The patch you sent is not clear either, it implicitly ties in STIBP
> with eIBRS. There is no explanation anywhere that IBRS just means
> KERNEL_IBRS.
Ok, so something like this on top?
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bugs.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bugs.c
index b97c0d28e573..fb3079445700 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bugs.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bugs.c
@@ -1201,6 +1201,10 @@ spectre_v2_user_select_mitigation(void)
/*
* If no STIBP, enhanced IBRS is enabled, or SMT impossible,
* STIBP is not required.
+ *
+ * For legacy IBRS, STIBP may still be needed because IBRS is only
+ * enabled in kernel space, so user space isn't protected from indirect
+ * branch prediction attacks from a sibling CPU thread.
*/
if (!boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_STIBP) ||
!smt_possible ||
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-02-20 19:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-02-20 12:01 [PATCH RESEND] x86/speculation: Fix user-mode spectre-v2 protection with KERNEL_IBRS KP Singh
2023-02-20 12:13 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2023-02-20 12:20 ` KP Singh
2023-02-20 12:34 ` KP Singh
2023-02-20 16:34 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2023-02-20 17:46 ` Borislav Petkov
2023-02-20 17:59 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2023-02-20 18:01 ` KP Singh
2023-02-20 18:22 ` Borislav Petkov
2023-02-20 18:44 ` KP Singh
2023-02-20 18:51 ` Borislav Petkov
2023-02-20 18:56 ` KP Singh
2023-02-20 19:02 ` Borislav Petkov
2023-02-20 19:10 ` KP Singh
2023-02-20 18:27 ` [PATCH] x86/bugs: Allow STIBP with IBRS Josh Poimboeuf
2023-02-20 18:28 ` kernel test robot
2023-02-20 18:33 ` KP Singh
2023-02-20 18:59 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2023-02-20 19:04 ` KP Singh
2023-02-20 19:19 ` Josh Poimboeuf [this message]
2023-02-27 19:59 ` [tip: x86/urgent] x86/speculation: Allow enabling STIBP with legacy IBRS tip-bot2 for KP Singh
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=20230220191938.hti3ktgh4idzx7iu@treble \
--to=jpoimboe@kernel.org \
--cc=aesa@google.com \
--cc=alexandre.chartre@oracle.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=daniel.sneddon@linux.intel.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=evn@google.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jmattson@google.com \
--cc=joseloliveira11@gmail.com \
--cc=kim.phillips@amd.com \
--cc=kpsingh@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=pjt@google.com \
--cc=rodrigo@kernelhacking.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--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