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  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:	Thu, 24 May 2012 13:12:46 +0800
From:	Alex Shi <>
To:	Andrew Lutomirski <>
CC:	Peter Zijlstra <>,
	Jan Beulich <>,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 8/8] x86/tlb: just do tlb flush on one of siblings
 of SMT

On 05/24/2012 09:46 AM, Andrew Lutomirski wrote:

> On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 10:15 AM, Peter Zijlstra <> wrote:
>> On Wed, 2012-05-23 at 19:09 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>>> There is no comment or anything else indicating that this is
>>>> suitable for dual-thread CPUs only - when there are more than
>>>> 2 threads per core, the intended effect won't be achieved.
>>> Why would that be? Won't higher thread count still share the same
>>> resources just more so?
>> Ah, I see, you're saying his code is buggy for >2 threads. Agreed.
> An evil knob to statically choose which SMT sibling gets the interrupt
> would be nice.  Then my compute-intensive thread could be (mostly)
> unaffected by the other thread on a different core that calls munmap
> frequently.

How to know we are in such situation? :)

> --Andy

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists