| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20090228173813.6d86c0ef@infradead.org> Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2009 17:38:13 -0800 From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org> To: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org> Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, mingo@...e.hu, nickpiggin@...oo.com.au, sqazi@...gle.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, tglx@...utronix.de Subject: Re: [patch] x86, mm: pass in 'total' to __copy_from_user_*nocache() On Sun, 1 Mar 2009 02:48:22 +0100 Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org> wrote: > > the entire point of using movntq and friends was to save half the > > I thought the point was to not pollute caches? At least that is > what I remember being told when I merged the patch. > the reason that movntq and co are faster is because you avoid the write-allocate behavior of the caches.... the cache polluting part of it I find hard to buy for general use (as this discussion shows)... that will be extremely hard to measure as a real huge thing, while the WA part is like a 1.5x to 2x thing. -- Arjan van de Ven Intel Open Source Technology Centre For development, discussion and tips for power savings, visit http://www.lesswatts.org -- 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