[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4BF2F9E4.8020808@zytor.com>
Date: Tue, 18 May 2010 13:34:44 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@...cle.com>
CC: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Venkatesh Pallipadi <venki@...gle.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, chris.mason@...cle.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: Export tsc related information in sysfs
On 05/18/2010 01:29 PM, Dan Magenheimer wrote:
>
> Yes, understood, a minor semantic issue. From a kernel perspective
> vsyscalls are kernelspace, so IIUC this is OK with tglx/etc.
>
> Since vsyscall shouldn't be using rdtsc when the kernel
> doesn't trust TSC, it doesn't matter if CR4.TSD is enabled when
> the kernel doesn't trust TSC.
>
That is correct.
> I'm still not sure if you are in favor of optionally emulating
> PL3 rdtsc instructions or not? I thought my proposal was
> just filling out some details of your proposal and suggesting
> a default.
I'm not in favor of emulating rdtsc instructions. I would consider
letting them SIGILL (actually SIGSEGV since RDTSC #GP in userspace) when
the TSC is unavailable, though.
It's not clear to me that it's possible, though, since that also affects
RDTSCP.
-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