On Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 02:42:04PM +0300, Martin-Éric Racine wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 3:15 PM Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 01:38:27PM +0200, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> >
> > > So that puts the whole __FILL_RETU
On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 01:38:27PM +0200, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> So that puts the whole __FILL_RETURN_BUFFER inside an alternative, and
> we can't have nested alternatives. That's unfortunate.
Well, both alternatives end with the LFENCE instruction, so I could pull
it out and do two consequtive
On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 10:47:21AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 02:33:08AM +0200, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > From: Ben Hutchings
> >
> > The mitigation for PBRSB includes adding LFENCE instructions to the
> > RSB filling sequence. However,
On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 02:33:08AM +0200, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> From: Ben Hutchings
>
> The mitigation for PBRSB includes adding LFENCE instructions to the
> RSB filling sequence. However, RSB filling is done on some older CPUs
> that don't support the LFENCE instruction.
>
Wait; what? There
4 matches
Mail list logo
