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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Thu, 23 Oct 2008 16:47:42 -0700
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	akataria@...are.com
CC:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
	Daniel Hecht <dhecht@...are.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Skip tsc synchronization checks if CONSTANT_TSC bit is
 set.

Alok Kataria wrote:
> 
> I am ok with the CONSTANT_TSC bit check, but if people think that its
> not important to skip this for native, i think adding a new flag to skip
> this should be safe enough.
> 
> Ingo, HPA your views on this whole detection and skipping thing ? 
> 

Okay, first of all, I'm somewhat leery (to put it mildly) of trusting a 
CPUID bit to tell me a *system* property, which is that all cores in the 
system are synchronized.  The CPU designer will know that all the cores 
in the *package* are synchronized, but if that extends system-wide is a 
property beyond the CPU.  Now, if I'm not completely mistaken, in the 
case of AMD this bit is actually set by the BIOS via a magic MSR, but 
that doesn't mean it can't be wrong.

As far as skipping the check, it makes sense for me in the case of known 
virtualization platforms; a CPU feature bit, real or synthetic, is a 
very clean way to do that.  In general we should centralize CPU 
knowledge to arch/x86/kernel/cpu and have the code outside look for 
specific feature flags, and that applies to virtualization platforms, too.

	-hpa
--
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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ