From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.linutronix.de (193.142.43.55:993) by crypto-ml.lab.linutronix.de with IMAP4-SSL for ; 24 Oct 2019 18:24:10 -0000 Received: from esa3.hc3370-68.iphmx.com ([216.71.145.155]) by Galois.linutronix.de with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1iNhmK-0006EU-Ps for speck@linutronix.de; Thu, 24 Oct 2019 20:24:09 +0200 Subject: [MODERATED] Re: [PATCH 4/9] TAA 4 References: <04f1ef8158e54eca18fc3951d75a00c5d398c429.1571905227.git.bp@suse.de> <20191024153240.26zdyr33r2o632ej@treble> <20191024164329.GE14115@zn.tnic> From: Andrew Cooper Message-ID: Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2019 19:23:57 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20191024164329.GE14115@zn.tnic> Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="dVs3yEOakKUDP9akccp5i1MnaSsOCYafh"; protected-headers="v1" To: speck@linutronix.de List-ID: --dVs3yEOakKUDP9akccp5i1MnaSsOCYafh Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Language: en-GB On 24/10/2019 17:43, speck for Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 10:32:40AM -0500, speck for Josh Poimboeuf wrot= e: >> As I said before this would be a lot nicer if we could just add NO_TAA= >> to the cpu_vuln_whitelist. > We're waiting for a list of CPUs from Intel here, right? > There is no model list required.=C2=A0 Vulnerability to TAA is calculable= directly from existing architectural sources. While the original expression might be ugly, and could probably be explained more clearly, it is correct AFAICT.=C2=A0 I certainly have a ve= ry similar one in Xen. ~Andrew --dVs3yEOakKUDP9akccp5i1MnaSsOCYafh--