[MODERATED] Re: [PATCH 9/9] TAA 9
Borislav Petkov <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | org.kernel.lore.historical-speck |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 11:10:16AM -0500, speck for Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> I think this is misleading. tsx=on doesn't make you vulnerable to TAA,
> because we still the TAA mitigation.
Changed to:
Therefore TSX is not enabled by default (aka tsx=off). An admin
might override this decision by tsx=on the command line parameter.
Even with TSX enabled, the kernel will attempt to enable the best
possible TAA mitigation setting depending on the microcode available
for the particular machine.
> tsx=on vs tsx=auto is not a security consideration, but rather a
> performance one. With tsx=auto you disable TSX on some TAA-affected
> CPUs so you don't have to pay the performance penalty of the MDS
> mitigations.
By performance penalty you mean, when you have TSX disabled on those
parts, you'll save yourself the VERW which should be taking care of TAA
too?
>
> > +
> > +config X86_INTEL_TSX_MODE_OFF
> > + bool "off"
> > + help
> > + TSX is always disabled - equals tsx=off command line parameter.
>
> Define "always" :-)
Changed to:
"TSX is disabled if possible - equals to tsx=off command line parameter."
> Not exactly :-) This also leaves TSX enabled on MDS vulnerable parts.
Your point being, the MD_CLEAR which takes care of TAA too?
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH, GF: Felix Imendörffer, HRB 36809, AG Nürnberg
--