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  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:	Sun, 02 May 2010 20:44:56 +0300
From:	Avi Kivity <>
To:	Brian Gerst <>
CC:	Dexuan Cui <>,
	Sheng Yang <>,
	Ingo Molnar <>, "H. Peter Anvin" <>,,
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86: eliminate TS_XSAVE

On 05/02/2010 08:38 PM, Brian Gerst wrote:
> On Sun, May 2, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Avi Kivity<>  wrote:
>> The fpu code currently uses current->thread_info->status&  TS_XSAVE as
>> a way to distinguish between XSAVE capable processors and older processors.
>> The decision is not really task specific; instead we use the task status to
>> avoid a global memory reference - the value should be the same across all
>> threads.
>> Eliminate this tie-in into the task structure by using an alternative
>> instruction keyed off the XSAVE cpu feature; this results in shorter and
>> faster code, without introducing a global memory reference.
> I think you should either just use cpu_has_xsave, or extend this use
> of alternatives to all cpu features.  It doesn't make sense to only do
> it for xsave.

I was trying to avoid a performance regression relative to the current 
code, as it appears that some care was taken to avoid the memory reference.

I agree that it's probably negligible compared to the save/restore 
code.  If the x86 maintainers agree as well, I'll replace it with 

I have a truly marvellous patch that fixes the bug which this
signature is too narrow to contain.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists