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: <c52fc8684d6177051e6f5dc32c6466f0fc637375.1305560561.git.luto@mit.edu>
Date:	Mon, 16 May 2011 12:00:59 -0400
From:	Andy Lutomirski <luto@....EDU>
To:	x86@...nel.org
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@...64.org>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@....edu>
Subject: [PATCH v4 2/6] x86-64: Remove unnecessary barrier in vread_tsc

RDTSC is completely unordered on modern Intel and AMD CPUs.  The
Intel manual says that lfence;rdtsc causes all previous instructions
to complete before the tsc is read, and the AMD manual says to use
mfence;rdtsc to do the same thing.

>From a decent amount of testing [1] this is enough to make rdtsc
be ordered with respect to subsequent loads across a wide variety
of CPUs.

On Sandy Bridge (i7-2600), this improves a loop of
clock_gettime(CLOCK_MONOTONIC) by more than 5 ns/iter.

[1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/4/18/350

Signed-off-by: Andy Lutomirski <luto@....edu>
---
 arch/x86/kernel/tsc.c |    9 +++++----
 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/tsc.c b/arch/x86/kernel/tsc.c
index bc46566..7cabdae 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/tsc.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/tsc.c
@@ -769,13 +769,14 @@ static cycle_t __vsyscall_fn vread_tsc(void)
 	cycle_t ret;
 
 	/*
-	 * Surround the RDTSC by barriers, to make sure it's not
-	 * speculated to outside the seqlock critical section and
-	 * does not cause time warps:
+	 * Empirically, a fence (of type that depends on the CPU)
+	 * before rdtsc is enough to ensure that rdtsc is ordered
+	 * with respect to loads.  The various CPU manuals are unclear
+	 * as to whether rdtsc can be reordered with later loads,
+	 * but no one has ever seen it happen.
 	 */
 	rdtsc_barrier();
 	ret = (cycle_t)vget_cycles();
-	rdtsc_barrier();
 
 	return ret >= VVAR(vsyscall_gtod_data).clock.cycle_last ?
 		ret : VVAR(vsyscall_gtod_data).clock.cycle_last;
-- 
1.7.5.1

--
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ