Currently we don't report anything useful in /proc/<pid>/status:
$ grep Speculation_Store_Bypass /proc/self/status
Speculation_Store_Bypass: unknown
Our mitigation is currently always a barrier instruction, which
doesn't map that well onto the existing possibilities for the PR_SPEC
values.
However even if we added a "barrier" type PR_SPEC value, userspace
would still need to consult some other source to work out which type
of barrier to use. So reporting "vulnerable" seems sufficient, as
userspace can see that and then consult its source to determine what
barrier to use.
Signed-off-by: Gustavo Walbon <gwalbon@linux.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200402124929.3574166-1-mpe@ellerman.id.au
d93e5e2d03