Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] x86/retpoline: Avoid return buffer underflows on context switch | From | David Woodhouse <> | Date | Tue, 09 Jan 2018 00:48:02 +0000 |
| |
On Tue, 2018-01-09 at 00:44 +0000, Woodhouse, David wrote: > On IRC, Arjan assures me that 'pause' here really is sufficient as a > speculation trap. If we do end up returning back here as a > misprediction, that 'pause' will stop the speculative execution on > affected CPUs even though it isn't *architecturally* documented to do > so. > > Arjan, can you confirm that in email please?
That actually doesn't make sense to me. If 'pause' alone is sufficient, then why in $DEITY's name would we need a '1:pause;jmp 1b' loop in the retpoline itself?
Arjan?[unhandled content-type:application/x-pkcs7-signature] | |