linux-kernel - Re: questions on how x86 uses IPI for tlb invalidates

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 19 Nov 2008 03:20:25 +1100
From:	Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>
To:	Kumar Gala <kumar.gala@...escale.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: questions on how x86 uses IPI for tlb invalidates

On Wednesday 19 November 2008 03:06, Kumar Gala wrote:
> On Nov 18, 2008, at 10:03 AM, Nick Piggin wrote:

> > You can't do the broadcast TLB invalidates in kunmap_atomic.
> > All that's needed in that case is to just invalidate the local
> > CPU.
>
> Agreed, I was planning on fixing that.  I guess the high level
> question is if a broadcast invalidate can occur in soft or hard irq
> context.

x86 does them for unmapping KVA (except kunmap_atomic), and
unmapping UVA. Unmapping KVA (eg. kunmap, vunmap) is not allowed
in irq context.

So long as you fix kunmap_atomic, you shouldn't have a problems.
--
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/