On 11/19/2018 12:55 PM, Jiri Kosina wrote: > On Mon, 19 Nov 2018, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > >> >> So before that change IBPB was usable without STIBP, now not longer. What's >> the rationale? >> >> This patch changes a gazillion things at once and is completely >> unreviewable. > > The patchset actually ties together IBPB and STIBP pretty closely, which > is IMO a good thing; there is no good reason why anone would want just one > of those (or each in a different mode), at least before this magical > coscheduling exists. > > But I guess this fact should be documented somewhere. >
Yes, it wouldn't make sense for having just one of those if a task is worried about attack from user space. I'll document it. Tim
