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
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2012 10:03:03 -0800 From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com> To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> CC: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...ux.intel.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Mario Gzuk <mariogzuk@...hnikz.de> Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/8] x86, cleanups: Simplify sync_core() in the case of no CPUID On 11/30/2012 09:01 AM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 1:24 PM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@...ux.intel.com> wrote: >> >> Thinking about it some more, there is another reason to not do this, >> which is that we don't want this particular CPUID to be paravirtualized; >> we're after the synchronizing side effect, not the CPUID return value >> itself. >> >> So let's leave it as a primitive; it gets too confusing otherwise. > > Hmm. The virtualization issue brings up another point: do we *really* > want to use cpuid for serialization at all? > Well, the grand total of serializing instructions are: INVD, INVEPT, INVLPG, INVVPID, LGDT, LIDT, LLDT, LTR, MOV to CR, MOV to DR, WBINVD, WRMSR, CPUID, IRET, RSM. It doesn't really leave a lot of wiggle room, and in the microcode case, the use of CPUID level 1 is actually mandated (presumably to get a uniform sequence for validation purposes.) > From all of the above, the alternatives case is kinda relevant for virt > where we do text_poke_early in a loop for every alternative section > so this could pile up to a bunch of vmexits depending on the emulated > hardware. Might be worth a replacement if it is noticeable in guests. This is still boot time, and I really doubt it is measurable in the long run. Yes, exists suck, but at least CPUID is generally a quick exit, since all the relevant state is in registers. -hpa -- H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf. -- 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