Re: [PATCH 5.18 01/11] Documentation: Add documentation for Processor MMIO Stale Data

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

 



On Wed, Jun 15, 2022 at 08:06:37AM +0700, Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
On 6/15/22 01:40, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
+  .. list-table::
+
+     * - 'Not affected'
+       - The processor is not vulnerable
+     * - 'Vulnerable'
+       - The processor is vulnerable, but no mitigation enabled
+     * - 'Vulnerable: Clear CPU buffers attempted, no microcode'
+       - The processor is vulnerable, but microcode is not updated. The
+         mitigation is enabled on a best effort basis.
+     * - 'Mitigation: Clear CPU buffers'
+       - The processor is vulnerable and the CPU buffer clearing mitigation is
+         enabled.
+
+If the processor is vulnerable then the following information is appended to
+the above information:
+
+  ========================  ===========================================
+  'SMT vulnerable'          SMT is enabled
+  'SMT disabled'            SMT is disabled
+  'SMT Host state unknown'  Kernel runs in a VM, Host SMT state unknown
+  ========================  ===========================================
+

Why is list-table used in sysfs table instead of usual ASCII table in SMT
vulnerabilities list above? I think using ASCII table in both cases is enough
for the purpose.

Maybe you are right (and I am no expert in this), but quite a few
documents use list-table for sysfs status:

  https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/admin-guide/hw-vuln/mds.rst
  https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/admin-guide/hw-vuln/spectre.rst
  https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/admin-guide/hw-vuln/tsx_async_abort.rst



[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux FS]     [Yosemite Forum]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Device Mapper]     [Linux Resources]

  Powered by Linux