[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4A369914.4010903@zytor.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 11:55:16 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
CC: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
mingo@...hat.com, paulus@...ba.org, acme@...hat.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl,
penberg@...helsinki.fi, vegard.nossum@...il.com, efault@....de,
jeremy@...p.org, npiggin@...e.de, tglx@...utronix.de,
linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [tip:perfcounters/core] perf_counter: x86: Fix call-chain support
to use NMI-safe methods
Ingo Molnar wrote:
>>>
>> I wouldn't actually expect that, *as long as* there is
>> serialization between the cr2 write and the cr2 read.
>
> Well, is there any OS that heavily relies on cr2 writes and which
> uses them from NMI context, and which CPU makers care about?
> (Meaning: Windows, pretty much.)
>
> If not then i agree that in theory it should work fine, but in
> practice we only know that we dont know the unknown risk here ;-)
>
I think you can drop "uses them from NMI context" from that statement;
writing to %cr2 is independent of the context.
I can try to find out internally what Intel's position on writing %cr2
is, but it'll take a while; however, KVM should be able to tell you if
any random OS uses %cr2 writes (as should a static disassembly of their
kernel.)
-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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists