linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/9] rework of extended state handling, LWP support

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: <m2ipm2lioy.fsf@firstfloor.org>
Date:	Tue, 29 Nov 2011 13:31:09 -0800
From:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To:	Hans Rosenfeld <hans.rosenfeld@....com>
Cc:	<hpa@...or.com>, <tglx@...utronix.de>, <mingo@...e.hu>,
	<suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>, <eranian@...gle.com>,
	<brgerst@...il.com>, <robert.richter@....com>,
	<Andreas.Herrmann3@....com>, <x86@...nel.org>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/9] rework of extended state handling, LWP support

Hans Rosenfeld <hans.rosenfeld@....com> writes:
>
> The lazy allocation of the xstate area has been removed. The support for
> extended states that cannot be saved/restored lazily, like AMD's LWP,
> need this. Since optimized library functions using SSE etc. are widely
> used today, most processes would have an xstate area anyway, making the
> memory overhead negligible.

Do you have any data on that?  It sounds dubious for specialized
workloads.

-Andi

-- 
ak@...ux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only
--
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/