linux-kernel - Re: RFC: outb 0x80 in inb_p, outb_p harmful on some modern AMD64 with MCP51 laptops

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 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:	Fri, 07 Dec 2007 19:45:25 +0100
From:	Rene Herman <rene.herman@...access.nl>
To:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
CC:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	"David P. Reed" <dpreed@...d.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: RFC: outb 0x80 in inb_p, outb_p harmful on some modern AMD64
 with MCP51 laptops

On 07-12-07 18:19, Alan Cox wrote:

> On Fri, 7 Dec 2007 17:31:16 +0100
> Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org> wrote:
> 
>>> You don't need to. Port 0x80 historically is about 8uS so just udelay(8)
>>> and make sure the initial default delay is conservative enough before the
>> How would you make it conservative enough handling let's say a 6Ghz CPU
>> that can execute multiple jumps per cycle?
> 
> Pick a sane worst case and go with it at boot. We don't have to be
> accurate before we tune udelay - over long in uSecs isnt going to hurt,
> and most post boot _p's can be replaced by udelay(8) now

Isn't 8 generally a bit overly long? I believe the norm is 1?

Rene.
--
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/