linux-kernel - Re: [bisected] Clocksource tsc unstable git

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20101105212749.GA1559@arch.trippelsdorf.de>
Date:	Fri, 5 Nov 2010 22:27:49 +0100
From:	Markus Trippelsdorf <markus@...ppelsdorf.de>
To:	Borislav Petkov <bp@...64.org>
Cc:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
	john stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"hpa@...ux.intel.com" <hpa@...ux.intel.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	"Herrmann3, Andreas" <Andreas.Herrmann3@....com>,
	"heiko.carstens@...ibm.com" <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
	"a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl" <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	"avi@...hat.com" <avi@...hat.com>,
	"mtosatti@...hat.com" <mtosatti@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [bisected] Clocksource tsc unstable git

On Fri, Nov 05, 2010 at 05:42:25PM +0100, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 05, 2010 at 05:09:19PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 02, 2010 at 11:26:54AM -0400, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > Ok, I'm waiting for Boris to get us the confirmation from HW folks.
> > 
> > However, we don't know (yet) whether this can be used in the
> > non-periodic mode too. My gut feeling says yes but I wouldn't trust it.
> > 
> > We went and collected that value a bunch of systems and it looks like it
> > would need more massaging (read: capping) since some BIOSen simply write
> > crap in it. It ranges from
> > 
> > - 0x37ee on old nVidia and Intel boards (this is definitely crap, I
> > can't imagine a minimum ticks value of 14318 for a HPET but who knows)
> > 
> > - 0x1000 on a HP machine (also fishy)
> > 
> > - 0x10, 0x14 on current SBxxx boards
> > 
> > - 0x80 on newer Intel boards
> 
> "min tick: 20" on my machine. Given that 12 is running stable here, maybe
> the value is a bit too large?

Err, 20==0x14 so it's not that much difference and it's running fine here
also.

Feel free to add:
    Reported-and-tested-by: Markus Trippelsdorf <markus@...ppelsdorf.de>

Thanks.

-- 
Markus
--
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/