Pawan Gupta pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com writes:
On Wed, Jun 15, 2022 at 08:06:37AM +0700, Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
On 6/15/22 01:40, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
- .. list-table::
* - 'Not affected'- The processor is not vulnerable* - 'Vulnerable'- The processor is vulnerable, but no mitigation enabled* - 'Vulnerable: Clear CPU buffers attempted, no microcode'- The processor is vulnerable, but microcode is not updated. Themitigation is enabled on a best effort basis.* - 'Mitigation: Clear CPU buffers'- The processor is vulnerable and the CPU buffer clearing mitigation isenabled.+If the processor is vulnerable then the following information is appended to +the above information:
- ======================== ===========================================
- 'SMT vulnerable' SMT is enabled
- 'SMT disabled' SMT is disabled
- 'SMT Host state unknown' Kernel runs in a VM, Host SMT state unknown
- ======================== ===========================================
Why is list-table used in sysfs table instead of usual ASCII table in SMT vulnerabilities list above? I think using ASCII table in both cases is enough for the purpose.
Maybe you are right (and I am no expert in this), but quite a few documents use list-table for sysfs status:
https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/admin-guide/hw-vuln/mds.rst https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/admin-guide/hw-vuln/spectre.rst https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/admin-guide/hw-vuln/tsx_async_abort...
List-table should really be avoided whenever possible; it makes reading the plain-text files difficult at best. I'd like to see the existing uses taken out over time.
This isn't really something to be addressed in the stable updates, though.
jon