On Tue, 18 Nov 2014, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 12:38:14AM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > Well a bitmask is a pretty indescriptive item as well. Putting my user
> > hat on: Where is the documentation for the bits?
>
> $ cat /sys/devices/system/cpu/bugs
> 0xXXXXXX - currently enabled workarounds are the set bits.
> bit 0: workaround for bug#blabla
> bit 1: workaround for bug#1
> bit 2: workaround for bug#2; remember to do <bla> before disabling workaround
> ...
> bits n-63 are reserved, cannot be set and RAZ.
You sure that 64 are enough?
You need to create stable but numbers, i.e. each bug gets a fixed but
number whethr it affects the machine or not. Otherwise you will drive
admins completely nuts.
> This will be issued when user cats the sysfs file.
That might work as well, though you want that to be:
/sys/devices/system/cpu/bugs/
/sys/devices/system/cpu/bugs/status
/sys/devices/system/cpu/bugs/enable_workaround
/sys/devices/system/cpu/bugs/disable_workaround
The latter two take a bit number rather than a magic mask.
So while it looks less effort to implement and extend in the first
place I think, that a bit of infrastructure work will make the
explicit scheme I proposed before a no brainer to maintain and extend,
but I cannot judge what's more intuitive to use.
Thanks,
tglx
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
