Re: [PATCH] x86/bugs/multihit: Fix mitigation reporting when KVM is not in use

[Sean Christopherson]

On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 10:18:20AM -0700, Pawan Gupta wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 05:51:30PM -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 02:20:59PM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
> > > On 7/14/20 2:04 PM, Pawan Gupta wrote:
> > > >> I see three inputs and four possible states (sorry for the ugly table,
> > > >> it was this or a spreadsheet :):
> > > >>
> > > >> X86_FEATURE_VMX	CONFIG_KVM_*	hpage split  Result	   Reason
> > > >> 	N			x	    x	     Not Affected  No VMX
> > > >> 	Y			N	    x	     Not affected  No KVM
> > 
> > This line item is pointless, the relevant itlb_multihit_show_state()
> > implementation depends on CONFIG_KVM_INTEL.  The !KVM_INTEL version simply
> > prints ""Processor vulnerable".
> 
> While we are on it, for CONFIG_KVM_INTEL=n would it make sense to report "Not
> affected(No KVM)"? "Processor vulnerable" is not telling much about the
> mitigation.

I know we don't care too much about out-of-tree hypervisors, but IMO stating
"Not affected" is unnecessarily hostile and "Processor vulnerable" is an
accurate statement.