Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Date | Tue, 13 Feb 2018 14:28:19 +0100 | From | Peter Zijlstra <> | Subject | Re: [tip:x86/pti] Revert "x86/speculation: Simplify indirect_branch_prediction_barrier()" |
| |
On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 12:28:38PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> Separate would be better, it makes sense and is one problem less to worry about?
Something like so then? I'm not entirely sure which commit wants to fo in Fixes, I picked the earlier one, but it could equally have been:
Fixes: f208820a321f ("Revert "x86/speculation: Simplify indirect_branch_prediction_barrier()"")
--- Subject: x86/speculation: Add msr-index.h From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2018 10:41:32 +0100
Joe Konno reported a compile failure resulting from using an MSR without inclusion of msr-index.h, and while the current code builds fine (by accident) this needs fixing for future patches.
Cc: mingo@kernel.org Cc: dwmw2@infradead.org Cc: torvalds@linux-foundation.org Cc: bp@alien8.de Cc: tglx@linutronix.de Cc: arjan@linux.intel.com Cc: dan.j.williams@intel.com Cc: dave.hansen@linux.intel.com Cc: jpoimboe@redhat.com Cc: hpa@zytor.com Cc: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org Cc: dwmw@amazon.co.uk Cc: luto@kernel.org Fixes: 20ffa1caecca ("x86/speculation: Add basic IBPB (Indirect Branch Prediction Barrier) support") Reported-by: Joe Konno <joe.konno@linux.intel.com> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> --- arch/x86/include/asm/nospec-branch.h | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/nospec-branch.h +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/nospec-branch.h @@ -6,6 +6,7 @@ #include <asm/alternative.h> #include <asm/alternative-asm.h> #include <asm/cpufeatures.h> +#include <asm/msr-index.h> #ifdef __ASSEMBLY__
| |