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]

Date:	Tue, 04 Nov 2008 12:02:25 -0800
From:	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
CC:	Alexander van Heukelum <heukelum@...tmail.fm>,
	Alexander van Heukelum <heukelum@...lshack.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, lguest@...abs.org,
	jeremy@...source.com, Steven Rostedt <srostedt@...hat.com>,
	Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>,
	Mike Travis <travis@....com>,
	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC/RFB] x86_64, i386: interrupt dispatch changes

Ingo Molnar wrote:
> ( another advantage is that the 6 bytes GDT descriptor is more 
>   compressed and hence uses up less L1/L2 cache footprint than the 
>   larger (~7 byte) trampolines we have at the moment. )
>   

Also its D cache rather than I cache, which is generally more 
plentiful.  However, I think the cost of GDT cache misses on exception 
latency is something that we've largely overlooked, and this will make 
it a bigger factor (vs cache misses on the actual exception handler code 
itself, which should be reduced).

    J
--
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/