From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.2 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 248F7C433F5 for ; Mon, 13 Sep 2021 21:39:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03BFD610CC for ; Mon, 13 Sep 2021 21:39:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S244252AbhIMVks (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Sep 2021 17:40:48 -0400 Received: from mga01.intel.com ([192.55.52.88]:30216 "EHLO mga01.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1346827AbhIMVki (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Sep 2021 17:40:38 -0400 X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6200,9189,10106"; a="244130580" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.85,290,1624345200"; d="scan'208";a="244130580" Received: from orsmga005.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.41]) by fmsmga101.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 13 Sep 2021 14:39:00 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.85,290,1624345200"; d="scan'208";a="650510625" Received: from ranerica-svr.sc.intel.com ([172.25.110.23]) by orsmga005.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 13 Sep 2021 14:39:00 -0700 Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2021 14:38:36 -0700 From: Ricardo Neri To: Borislav Petkov Cc: X86 ML , LKML , Marcus =?iso-8859-1?Q?R=FCckert?= Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/umip: Add a umip= cmdline switch Message-ID: <20210913213836.GA10627@ranerica-svr.sc.intel.com> References: <20210907200454.30458-1-bp@alien8.de> <20210911011459.GA11980@ranerica-svr.sc.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Sep 11, 2021 at 11:20:59AM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 06:14:59PM -0700, Ricardo Neri wrote: > > If it is printing the same information again and again, wouldn't it be > > simpler to have a umip_pr_warn_once()? > > If you do a once thing, you're blocking any other programs from warning, > output you probably wanna see. That is right. Although, I am not sure programs you can have in the same machine that also want to use UMIP-protected instructions. > > With the command line switch you do the same but you're at least pushing > the user to become active and do it first. I.e., with enabling that > option, the user basically says that she/he is not interested in any of > that output and that is ok. > > The optimal thing would be to ratelimit it per process but that would be > an overkill and not really needed. Indeed. Thanks and BR, Ricardo