[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090813161854.GB8534@aftab>
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 18:18:54 +0200
From: Borislav Petkov <borislav.petkov@....com>
To: Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>
CC: Kevin Winchester <kjwinchester@...il.com>, mikpe@...uu.se,
mingo@...e.hu, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86: Clear incorrectly forced X86_FEATURE_LAHF_LM
flag
On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 11:55:32AM -0400, Brian Gerst wrote:
[..]
> > Possibly. If there were some concern that:
> >
> > - The extra instructions would cause a performance impact, and the
> > test was significantly faster than the clear.
>
> Testing a bit is cheap and MSR accesses are not.
true.
> > - The extra instructions might actually cause more problems if the
> > flag is not set.
>
> These MSRs don't exist on older cpus and will cause a fault, which is
> handled at additional cost.
No, we're ok here since this code is exec'ed on K8s only. The _safe
variants are an additional precaution only.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Operating | Advanced Micro Devices GmbH
System | Karl-Hammerschmidt-Str. 34, 85609 Dornach b. München, Germany
Research | Geschäftsführer: Thomas M. McCoy, Giuliano Meroni
Center | Sitz: Dornach, Gemeinde Aschheim, Landkreis München
(OSRC) | Registergericht München, HRB Nr. 43632
--
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