[MODERATED] Re: ***UNCHECKED*** Re: [PATCH 9/9] TAA 9

Michal Hocko <[email protected]>
Newsgroups org.kernel.lore.historical-speck
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On Thu 24-10-19 18:58:28, speck for Borislav Petkov wrote:
> 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."

Thanks for refinements. The changelog and the help text was written at
the time when all this was still clear as mud.
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.