From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 844B5EAD7 for ; Thu, 4 Sep 2025 12:00:45 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1756987245; cv=none; b=Pv96qa7MlCecJWdpcJ3bdkJ2qYOpl5XSR7I6jxD2teqfroRfseuFsYQb4Py8xP7NWBAGVKodRHIF7TYg/dPpgui12dRtOS+drSQFRsj2XUwbGtYccT01BMS+AjrHTmLWAfneqat+yOplUoLxPXa31ajoQ32yapjsiFkpuIQHqyY= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1756987245; c=relaxed/simple; bh=eHAQ+W/4I6CC3eBj+DO0OcYiCnBTaVPzdBJxtNDrJl0=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=BrWmC5XxctsPifUaVYHnybY1uAeQTWU++lO65Fx4ztww3ULKYU5rzahRxdtcF9d2DIDL09Ffhi2q9F715KocI1ejQpb9NJUzbfgSdLknHRUwvOUApKCZU+DycVxgrhbzSq8p65Dfea5mXb29JazxU7ZlkOykqp84l0ns/O6oaI0= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linuxfoundation.org header.i=@linuxfoundation.org header.b=sdBOXLnc; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linuxfoundation.org header.i=@linuxfoundation.org header.b="sdBOXLnc" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8CEBEC4CEF0; Thu, 4 Sep 2025 12:00:44 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=linuxfoundation.org; s=korg; t=1756987245; bh=eHAQ+W/4I6CC3eBj+DO0OcYiCnBTaVPzdBJxtNDrJl0=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=sdBOXLncvnSI5y846UFKbS8FXeY3zIy+ZvuHo7dj3Hhr/OWvfUuiknRovO2B55ovs d7ngPnGWOc+AMTmARGXIQvbL3rzdZDNy+K3g+/I6j/7oKpzdoEtf5pOS9hjv3DVheP faEjLSrQBpaZEtPO7zSL0DgKjSUrxYae18T9WJ/Y= Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2025 14:00:41 +0200 From: Greg KH To: Suraj Jitindar Singh Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 5.10 0/4] x86/speculation: Make {JMP,CALL}_NOSPEC Consistent Message-ID: <2025090450-plaster-shadiness-1283@gregkh> References: <20250903225003.50346-1-surajjs@amazon.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: stable@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline 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? Do they actually fix anything? > 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. Does this actually allow this to happen? I think there are a few speculation fixes that have not been backported to this kernel tree, so why not just make this as a part of that work instead? Just adding infastructure that doesn't do anything isn't usually a good idea. thanks, greg k-h