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 ; 16 Oct 2019 07:20:15 -0000 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15] helo=mx1.suse.de) by Galois.linutronix.de with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA256:256) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1iKdbR-0006zS-MA for speck@linutronix.de; Wed, 16 Oct 2019 09:20:15 +0200 Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.220.254]) by mx1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id D26B4AED5 for ; Wed, 16 Oct 2019 07:20:07 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2019 09:20:06 +0200 (CEST) From: Jiri Kosina Subject: [MODERATED] Re: [PATCH v5 08/11] TAAv5 8 In-Reply-To: <20191016071425.hagogacjohvbqjsz@treble> Message-ID: References: <20191015152649.yim4krwuttrh6xgi@treble> <20191015200024.hxs4brxi7gbvmcdy@treble> <20191015205631.GF30412@guptapadev.amr> <20191015231252.kggxh6ffrciz2dfy@treble> <20191016071425.hagogacjohvbqjsz@treble> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: speck@linutronix.de List-ID: On Wed, 16 Oct 2019, speck for Josh Poimboeuf wrote: > Why wouldn't it be safe behavior? For both TAA_BUG cases, we can > mitigate TSX with verw buffer clearing. If ucodes providing verw clearing would indeed really become available even for MDS_NO=1 systems, then yes, and we would then probably default to TSX on. Thanks, -- Jiri Kosina SUSE Labs