linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC/RFB] x86_64, i386: interrupt dispatch changes

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]

Message-ID: <491090F3.5020701@zytor.com>
Date:	Tue, 04 Nov 2008 10:14:11 -0800
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	Alexander van Heukelum <heukelum@...tmail.fm>
CC:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>,
	Alexander van Heukelum <heukelum@...lshack.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, lguest@...abs.org,
	jeremy@...source.com, Steven Rostedt <srostedt@...hat.com>,
	Mike Travis <travis@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC/RFB] x86_64, i386: interrupt dispatch changes

Alexander van Heukelum wrote:
> 
> That's good to know. I assume this LOCKed bus cycle only occurs
> if the (hidden) segment information is not cached in some way?
> How many segments are typically cached? In particular, does it
> optimize switching between two segments?
> 

Yes, there is a segment descriptor cache (as opposed to the hidden but
architectural segment descriptor *registers*, which the Intel
documentation confusingly call a "cache".)

It is used to optimize switching between a small number of segments, and
was crucial for decent performance on Win9x, which contained a bunch of
16-bit code.

	-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/