linux-kernel - Re: [RFC 00/15] x86_64: Optimize percpu accesses

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 09 Jul 2008 15:22:44 -0700
From:	ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Mike Travis <travis@....com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Jack Steiner <steiner@....com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 00/15] x86_64: Optimize percpu accesses

Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org> writes:

> Note also that the 32 bit offset size limits the offset that can be added to the
> segment register. You either need to place the per cpu area either in the last
> 2G of the address space or in the first 2G. The zero based approach removes that
> limitation.

Good point.  Which means that fundamentally we need to come up with a special
linker segment or some other way to guarantee that the offsets we use for per
cpu variables is within 2G of the segment register.

Which means that my idea of using the technique we use on x86_32 will not work.

Eric
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/