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=-10.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham 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 3605DC43381 for ; Wed, 24 Feb 2021 13:08:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.xenproject.org (lists.xenproject.org [192.237.175.120]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D78C164E02 for ; Wed, 24 Feb 2021 13:08:56 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org D78C164E02 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=xenproject.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Received: from list by lists.xenproject.org with outflank-mailman.89338.168166 (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lEtu5-0008B4-GR; Wed, 24 Feb 2021 13:08:33 +0000 X-Outflank-Mailman: Message body and most headers restored to incoming version Received: by outflank-mailman (output) from mailman id 89338.168166; Wed, 24 Feb 2021 13:08:33 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.xenproject.org) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lEtu5-0008Ax-DT; Wed, 24 Feb 2021 13:08:33 +0000 Received: by outflank-mailman (input) for mailman id 89338; Wed, 24 Feb 2021 13:08:31 +0000 Received: from mail.xenproject.org ([104.130.215.37]) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lEtu3-0008As-Kr for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Wed, 24 Feb 2021 13:08:31 +0000 Received: from xenbits.xenproject.org ([104.239.192.120]) by mail.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lEtu3-0005qg-IW for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Wed, 24 Feb 2021 13:08:31 +0000 Received: from iwj (helo=mariner.uk.xensource.com) by xenbits.xenproject.org with local-bsmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lEtu3-0008Kr-Eq for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Wed, 24 Feb 2021 13:08:31 +0000 Received: from iwj by mariner.uk.xensource.com with local (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1lEtu0-0006tE-7O; Wed, 24 Feb 2021 13:08:28 +0000 X-BeenThere: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org List-Id: Xen developer discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Precedence: list Sender: "Xen-devel" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=xenproject.org; s=20200302mail; h=References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Cc:To:Date :Message-ID:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:MIME-Version:From; bh=t9oyT3HlfOULSjznKaqRaJXa222QqsLAnEmpdcIGz8k=; b=CtDkP9sen4ugan+JYeYqJqWacA UXVZzgv25BOYnq2G8T9vO+8eSosiS3f/h21l7yFgrRRnOiUUWL7jrvDqQuG9IeUXUoPcOwAHeNM84 bfYml255hA/wr030YsxcyVlbPl+htkBlUzZgAQOdvhw0uyW8keFpa0+CAC8Acm7iNywI=; From: Ian Jackson MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <24630.20427.917602.787877@mariner.uk.xensource.com> Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2021 13:08:27 +0000 To: Jan Beulich Cc: "xen-devel\@lists.xenproject.org" , Andrew Cooper , Wei Liu , Roger Pau =?iso-8859-1?Q?Monn=E9?= , George Dunlap Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/8] x86/PV: avoid speculation abuse through guest accessors In-Reply-To: References: <24623.56913.290437.499946@mariner.uk.xensource.com> X-Mailer: VM 8.2.0b under 24.5.1 (i686-pc-linux-gnu) Jan Beulich writes ("Re: [PATCH v2 0/8] x86/PV: avoid speculation abuse through guest accessors"): > On 19.02.2021 16:50, Ian Jackson wrote: > > Jan Beulich writes ("[PATCH v2 0/8] x86/PV: avoid speculation abuse through guest accessors"): > >> 4: rename {get,put}_user() to {get,put}_guest() > >> 5: gdbsx: convert "user" to "guest" accesses > >> 6: rename copy_{from,to}_user() to copy_{from,to}_guest_pv() > >> 7: move stac()/clac() from {get,put}_unsafe_asm() ... > >> 8: PV: use get_unsafe() instead of copy_from_unsafe() > > > > These have not got a maintainer review yet. To grant a release-ack > > I'd like an explanation of the downsides and upsides of taking this > > series in 4.15 ? > > > > You say "consistency" but in practical terms, what will happen if the > > code is not "conxistent" in this sense ? > > > > I'd also like to hear from aother hypervisor maintainer. > > Meanwhile they have been reviewed by Roger. Are you willing to > give them, perhaps with the exception of 7, a release ack as > well? Sorry, yes. I found these explanations convincing Thank you. For all except 7, Release-Acked-by: Ian Jackson For 7, I remember what I think was an IRC conversation where someone (you, I think) said you had examined the generated asm and it was unchanged. If I have remembered that correctly, then for 7 as well: Release-Acked-by: Ian Jackson If I have misremembered please do say. Ian.