From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <tglx@linutronix.de>
Received: from mail.linutronix.de (146.0.238.70:993) by
  crypto-ml.lab.linutronix.de with IMAP4-SSL for <speck@linutronix.de>; 28 Feb
  2019 13:08:42 -0000
Received: from [5.158.153.52] (helo=nanos.tec.linutronix.de)
	by Galois.linutronix.de with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256)
	(Exim 4.80)
	(envelope-from <tglx@linutronix.de>)
	id 1gzLQX-0007RC-K5
	for speck@linutronix.de; Thu, 28 Feb 2019 14:08:41 +0100
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2019 14:08:41 +0100 (CET)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [patch V5 01/14] MDS basics 1
In-Reply-To: <20190227152037.098146619@linutronix.de>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1902281402110.1821@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
References: <20190227150939.605235753@linutronix.de>
 <20190227152037.098146619@linutronix.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: speck@linutronix.de
List-ID: <speck.linutronix.de>

On Wed, 27 Feb 2019, speck for Thomas Gleixner wrote:

> Subject: [patch V5 01/14] x86/speculation: Add INTEL_FAM6_ATOM_AIRMONT_MID to SSB whitelist
> From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> 
> AIRMONT is not affected by SSB, but AIRMONT_MID is according to the white
> list. This does not make sense as the SILVERMONT/AIRMONT vulnerabilities
> are identical otherwise. Also the Intel website which lists the affected
> CPUs does not have AIRMONT_MID on the list.
> 
> Add it to the whitelist.

I'll drop that for now and wait for Intel to find the information ...