Avoid speculative indirect calls in kernel

Re:Avoid speculative indirect calls in kernel by ysleepy on Wednesday January 03, 2018 @08:20PM (#16067170)

Considering Intel is working on this for the last 6 months, it is indeed a little telling that they did not have the patch behind a feature flag. It also explains why AMD was so passive aggressive while inserting the exception for their CPUs. Seems like Intel was trying to make this some sort of act of god type of deal instead of writing out the if(intel){horrible mitigation}.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Avoid speculative indirect calls in kernel by jhanschoo on Wednesday January 03, 2018 @11:23PM (#16068023)

Can I see an article/discussion about AMD being passive-agressive about it? I want my popcorn.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Avoid speculative indirect calls in kernel by none_to_remain on Thursday January 04, 2018 @12:00AM (#16068162)

It is dry - https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/12/27/2

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Avoid speculative indirect calls in kernel by cryptonector on Thursday January 04, 2018 @12:28AM (#16068270)

Hardly passive-aggressive. What would the alternative have been? Leave PTI on on AMD just out of sympathy for Intel?!

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Avoid speculative indirect calls in kernel by mlosapio on Wednesday January 03, 2018 @11:58PM (#16068158)

https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/12/27/2

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Avoid speculative indirect calls in kernel by eftychis on Thursday January 04, 2018 @12:04AM (#16068177)

+1 :D

[ Parent | on HN ]