[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110726184744.GA8422@elte.hu>
Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2011 20:47:44 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...64.org>
Cc: Ray Lee <ray-lk@...rabbit.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Przywara, Andre" <Andre.Przywara@....com>,
"Pohlack, Martin" <Martin.Pohlack@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86, AMD: Correct F15h IC aliasing issue
* Borislav Petkov <bp@...64.org> wrote:
> > Was this done with a stock kernel, or with the simple patch
> > applied?
>
> with the simplest version of Linus' patch:
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/mmap.c b/arch/x86/mm/mmap.c
> index 1dab519..6b1094d 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/mm/mmap.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/mm/mmap.c
> @@ -90,6 +90,8 @@ static unsigned long mmap_rnd(void)
> rnd = (long)get_random_int() % (1<<8);
> else
> rnd = (long)(get_random_int() % (1<<28));
> +
> + rnd &= ~0x7;
So, unless i got the stats right, unmodified kernel has like a 75%
mis-aligned rate, while with the simple fix this goes down to 30%?
Have you run the numbers on the stock, unmodified kernel by any
chance, just to make sure the stats are ok?
Thanks,
Ingo
--
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