linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH tip:x86/mm 1/3] x86: A fast way to check capabilities of the current cpu

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]

Date:	Wed, 30 Mar 2011 18:07:56 +0200
From:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, x86@...nel.org,
	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH tip:x86/mm 1/3] x86: A fast way to check capabilities
 of the current cpu

Hello,

On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 08:58:23AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> >> Add this_cpu_has() which determines if the current cpu has a certain
> >> ability using a segment prefix and a bit test operation.
> > 
> > 
> > Hmm: if the CPU capability is really tested in a performance critical
> > path, wouldn't it even be better to just use static_branch() now? 
> > 
> 
> We have static_cpu_has() for this specific purpose (it actually predates
> static_branch()).

These patches have performance benefits but I don't think it would be
noticeable.  I think it's more of code cleanup.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
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/