Re: [RFC PATCH 52/56] x86/bugs: Support parsing mitigation options

From: Nikolay Borisov

Date: Mon Oct 27 2025 - 07:31:30 EST




On 10/13/25 17:34, David Kaplan wrote:
Add arch-specific function for determining if an option is related to a
mitigation and parsing it. These will be used for parsing a string of
options for re-evaluating cpu mitigations.

Signed-off-by: David Kaplan <david.kaplan@xxxxxxx>
---
arch/x86/include/asm/bugs.h | 2 ++
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bugs.c | 56 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
2 files changed, 58 insertions(+)

diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/bugs.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/bugs.h
index 2e1a7d282e51..1e142a676335 100644
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/bugs.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/bugs.h
@@ -13,5 +13,7 @@ static inline int ppro_with_ram_bug(void) { return 0; }
extern void cpu_bugs_smt_update(void);
void arch_cpu_reset_mitigations(void);
void cpu_bugs_update_speculation_msrs(void);
+bool arch_is_mitigation_opt(char *param);
+int arch_parse_mitigation_opt(char *param, char *val);
#endif /* _ASM_X86_BUGS_H */
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bugs.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bugs.c
index 2f82261d033d..26ceb42e0cfb 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bugs.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bugs.c
@@ -3991,6 +3991,62 @@ void __warn_thunk(void)
}
#ifdef CONFIG_DYNAMIC_MITIGATIONS
+struct mitigation_info {
+ char *param;
+ int (*parse)(char *str);
+};
+
+static struct mitigation_info mitigation_parsers[] = {
+ {"mds", mds_cmdline},
+ {"tsx_async_abort", tsx_async_abort_parse_cmdline},
+ {"mmio_stale_data", mmio_stale_data_parse_cmdline},
+ {"reg_file_data_sampling", rfds_parse_cmdline},
+ {"srbds", srbds_parse_cmdline},
+ {"gather_data_sampling", gds_parse_cmdline},
+ {"nospectre_v1", nospectre_v1_cmdline},
+ {"retbleed", retbleed_parse_cmdline},
+ {"indirect_target_selection", its_parse_cmdline},
+ {"spectre_v2_user", spectre_v2_user_parse_cmdline},
+ {"nospectre_v2", nospectre_v2_parse_cmdline},
+ {"spectre_v2", spectre_v2_parse_cmdline},
+ {"spectre_bhi", spectre_bhi_parse_cmdline},
+ {"nospec_store_bypass_disable", nossb_parse_cmdline},
+ {"spec_store_bypass_disable", ssb_parse_cmdline},
+ {"l1tf", l1tf_cmdline},
+ {"spec_rstack_overflow", srso_parse_cmdline},
+ {"tsa", tsa_parse_cmdline},
+ {"vmscape", vmscape_parse_cmdline}
+};
+
+static struct mitigation_info *get_mitigation_info(char *param)
+{
+ int i;
+
+ for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(mitigation_parsers); i++) {
+ if (parameq(param, mitigation_parsers[i].param))
+ return &mitigation_parsers[i];
+ }
+
+ return NULL;
+}
+
+bool arch_is_mitigation_opt(char *param)
+{
+ return get_mitigation_info(param);

nit: This has an implied conversion from a pointer to a bool, should it be return get_mitigation_info != NULL

It would work either ways but being explicit is better?

+}
+
+int arch_parse_mitigation_opt(char *param, char *val)
+{
+ struct mitigation_info *info = get_mitigation_info(param);
+
+ if (!info) {
+ pr_warn("Ignoring non-mitigation option %s\n", param);

nit: Do we want to be that verbose?

+ return 0;
+ }
+
+ return info->parse(val);
+}
+
void arch_cpu_reset_mitigations(void)
{
spectre_v1_reset_mitigation();