Re: [PATCH v4 0/5] arm64: errata: Rework Spectre BHB mitigations to not assume "safe"

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, 07 Jan 2025 12:05:57 -0800, Douglas Anderson wrote:
> Recently I realized that a device with some Qualcomm Kryo 4xx cores
> reported in `lscpu` that it was _not_ vulnerable to Spectre BHB. This
> seemed unlikely to me.
> 
> I wrote up a patch series to attempt (with a lot of guesswork) to add
> Qualcomm cores to the tables governing how the Spectre BHB mitigation
> worked.
> 
> [...]

Applied to arm64 (for-next/spectre-bhb-assume-vulnerable), thanks!

As per Will's suggestion at the end of last year:

https://lore.kernel.org/r/20241219175128.GA25477@willie-the-truck/

Doug has reworked the code to assume vulnerable by default. James did
suggest some splitting of patch 2 but given that Doug doesn't have time
for a respin I decided to queue the patches. If anyone has a strong
opinion, please let me know (and reworking the series is welcomed).

[1/5] arm64: errata: Add QCOM_KRYO_4XX_GOLD to the spectre_bhb_k24_list
      https://git.kernel.org/arm64/c/ed1ce841245d
[2/5] arm64: errata: Assume that unknown CPUs _are_ vulnerable to Spectre BHB
      https://git.kernel.org/arm64/c/e403e8538359
[3/5] arm64: errata: Add KRYO 2XX/3XX/4XX silver cores to Spectre BHB safe list
      https://git.kernel.org/arm64/c/0c9fc6e652cd
[4/5] arm64: cputype: Add MIDR_CORTEX_A76AE
      https://git.kernel.org/arm64/c/a9b5bd81b294
[5/5] arm64: errata: Add newer ARM cores to the spectre_bhb_loop_affected() lists
      https://git.kernel.org/arm64/c/a5951389e58d

-- 
Catalin





[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [Linux for Sparc]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]

  Powered by Linux