[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