From: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Suraj Jitindar Singh <surajjs@amazon.com>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5.10 0/4] x86/speculation: Make {JMP,CALL}_NOSPEC Consistent
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2025 14:01:47 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2025090447-rectangle-dastardly-b689@gregkh> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250903225003.50346-1-surajjs@amazon.com>
On Wed, Sep 03, 2025 at 03:49:59PM -0700, Suraj Jitindar Singh wrote:
> The 4 patches in this series make the JMP_NOSPEC and CALL_NOSPEC macros used
> in the kernel consistent with what is generated by the compiler.
>
> ("x86,nospec: Simplify {JMP,CALL}_NOSPEC") was merged in v6.0 and the remaining
> 3 patches in this series were merged in v6.15. All 4 were included in kernels
> v5.15+ as prerequisites for the backport of the ITS mitigations [1].
>
> None of these patches were included in the backport of the ITS mitigations to
> the 5.10 kernel [2]. They all apply cleanly and are applicable to the 5.10
> kernel. Thus I see no reason that they weren't applied here, unless someone can
> correct me?
>
> I am sending them for inclusion in the 5.10 kernel as this kernel is still
> actively maintained for these kind of vulnerability mitigations and as such
> having these patches will unify the handling of these cases with subsequent
> kernel versions easing code understanding and the ease of backports in the
> future.
Also, you only really have about 1 more year left for this kernel
version, why not take the time to move any systems that are somehow
still using this to a more modern kernel instead? What's preventing
that from happening?
Running any x86 systems on this old kernel right now is probably not a
good idea given the huge number of unfixed bugs in it...
thanks,
greg k-h
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-09-04 12:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-09-03 22:49 [PATCH 5.10 0/4] x86/speculation: Make {JMP,CALL}_NOSPEC Consistent Suraj Jitindar Singh
2025-09-03 22:50 ` [PATCH 5.10 1/4] x86,nospec: Simplify {JMP,CALL}_NOSPEC Suraj Jitindar Singh
2025-09-03 22:50 ` [PATCH 5.10 2/4] x86/speculation: Simplify and make CALL_NOSPEC consistent Suraj Jitindar Singh
2025-09-03 22:50 ` [PATCH 5.10 3/4] x86/speculation: Add a conditional CS prefix to CALL_NOSPEC Suraj Jitindar Singh
2025-09-03 22:50 ` [PATCH 5.10 4/4] x86/speculation: Remove the extra #ifdef around CALL_NOSPEC Suraj Jitindar Singh
2025-09-04 12:00 ` [PATCH 5.10 0/4] x86/speculation: Make {JMP,CALL}_NOSPEC Consistent Greg KH
2025-09-16 20:41 ` [PATCH 5.10 0/4] x86/speculation: Make {JMP, CALL}_NOSPEC Consistent Jitindar Singh, Suraj
2025-09-17 7:40 ` gregkh
2025-09-04 12:01 ` Greg KH [this message]
2025-09-16 20:44 ` Jitindar Singh, Suraj
2025-09-17 7:52 ` gregkh
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=2025090447-rectangle-dastardly-b689@gregkh \
--to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=surajjs@amazon.com \
/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