Pawan Gupta <pawan.kumar.gupta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > 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 List-table should really be avoided whenever possible; it makes reading the plain-text files difficult at best. I'd like to see the existing uses taken out over time. This isn't really something to be addressed in the stable updates, though. jon
