Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86/speculation: switch_to_cond_stibp on is the likely case

2018-12-07 Thread Thomas Gleixner
On Fri, 7 Dec 2018, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Thu, Dec 06, 2018 at 10:38:00AM -0500, Waiman Long wrote: > > On 12/06/2018 03:41 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > On Wed, Dec 05, 2018 at 02:49:28PM -0500, Waiman Long wrote: > > >> Since conditional STIBP is the default, it should be treated as > > >>

Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86/speculation: switch_to_cond_stibp on is the likely case

2018-12-07 Thread Peter Zijlstra
On Thu, Dec 06, 2018 at 10:38:00AM -0500, Waiman Long wrote: > On 12/06/2018 03:41 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 05, 2018 at 02:49:28PM -0500, Waiman Long wrote: > >> Since conditional STIBP is the default, it should be treated as > >> the likely case. Changes the use of static_branch_u

Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86/speculation: switch_to_cond_stibp on is the likely case

2018-12-06 Thread Waiman Long
On 12/06/2018 03:41 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Wed, Dec 05, 2018 at 02:49:28PM -0500, Waiman Long wrote: >> Since conditional STIBP is the default, it should be treated as >> the likely case. Changes the use of static_branch_unlikely() to >> static_branch_likely() for switch_to_cond_stibp. > So

Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86/speculation: switch_to_cond_stibp on is the likely case

2018-12-06 Thread Peter Zijlstra
On Wed, Dec 05, 2018 at 02:49:28PM -0500, Waiman Long wrote: > Since conditional STIBP is the default, it should be treated as > the likely case. Changes the use of static_branch_unlikely() to > static_branch_likely() for switch_to_cond_stibp. So now you're making kernels on 'fixed' or unaffected