[PATCH] powerpc/64s: Enhance the information in cpu_show_spectre_v1()
Michal Suchánek
msuchanek at suse.de
Wed May 30 00:46:40 AEST 2018
On Tue, 29 May 2018 16:13:49 +0200
Christophe LEROY <christophe.leroy at c-s.fr> wrote:
> Le 28/05/2018 à 15:19, Michal Suchanek a écrit :
> > We now have barrier_nospec as mitigation so print it in
> > cpu_show_spectre_v1 when enabled.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Michal Suchanek <msuchanek at suse.de>
> > ---
> > arch/powerpc/kernel/security.c | 5 ++++-
> > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/security.c
> > b/arch/powerpc/kernel/security.c index 0239383c7e4d..a0c32d53980b
> > 100644 --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/security.c
> > +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/security.c
> > @@ -120,7 +120,10 @@ ssize_t cpu_show_spectre_v1(struct device
> > *dev, struct device_attribute *attr, c if
> > (!security_ftr_enabled(SEC_FTR_BNDS_CHK_SPEC_BAR)) return
> > sprintf(buf, "Not affected\n");
> > - return sprintf(buf, "Vulnerable\n");
> > + if (barrier_nospec_enabled)
>
> > + return sprintf(buf, "Mitigation: __user pointer
> > sanitization\n");
> > + else
> > + return sprintf(buf, "Vulnerable\n");
>
> Checkpatch would tell you that an else is unneeded after a return. So
> just leave it as it was before.
Where did you get your copy of checkpatch? The one in Linux tree does
not do that.
Thanks
Michal
More information about the Linuxppc-dev
mailing list