[PATCH v2 3/3] powerpc/fsl: Implement cpu_show_spectre_v1/v2 for NXP PowerPC Book3E

Diana Madalina Craciun diana.craciun at nxp.com
Thu Jul 5 23:26:36 AEST 2018


On 07/03/2018 10:26 AM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> Michal Suchánek <msuchanek at suse.de> writes:
>> On Tue, 12 Jun 2018 02:59:11 +0000
>> Bharat Bhushan <bharat.bhushan at nxp.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Diana,
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Diana Craciun [mailto:diana.craciun at nxp.com]
>>>> Sent: Monday, June 11, 2018 6:23 PM
>>>> To: linuxppc-dev at lists.ozlabs.org
>>>> Cc: mpe at ellerman.id.au; oss at buserror.net; Leo Li
>>>> <leoyang.li at nxp.com>; Bharat Bhushan <bharat.bhushan at nxp.com>;
>>>> Diana Madalina Craciun <diana.craciun at nxp.com>
>>>> Subject: [PATCH v2 3/3] powerpc/fsl: Implement
>>>> cpu_show_spectre_v1/v2 for NXP PowerPC Book3E  
>>> Please add some description
>> To me the subject is self-explanatory. It implements a kernel interface
>> that was already described elsewhere.
>>
>> What are you missing here?
> It should at least explain why it's reimplementing a function that
> already exists for powerpc. ie. Why can't the existing version be used?
>
> cheers
>
OK. I think I can use the cpu_show_spectre_v1 and for now I can use
cpu_show_spectre_v2 as well (the patches are under development for
mitigating Spectre v2). But I cannot use cpu_show_meltdown because it
uses references to variables that are specific to BOOK3S_64. But I do
not need a special implementation for cpu_show_meltdown because our
platform is not vulnerable to Meltdown. So, I will just ifdef the
cpu_show_meltdown and leave the default implementation.

Diana






More information about the Linuxppc-dev mailing list