linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 0/3] qspinlock: Introducing a 4-byte queue spinlock

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: <53063D4A.9010601@hp.com>
Date:	Thu, 20 Feb 2014 12:37:14 -0500
From:	Waiman Long <waiman.long@...com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
CC:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Michel Lespinasse <walken@...gle.com>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	George Spelvin <linux@...izon.com>,
	Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
	Daniel J Blueman <daniel@...ascale.com>,
	Alexander Fyodorov <halcy@...dex.ru>,
	Aswin Chandramouleeswaran <aswin@...com>,
	Scott J Norton <scott.norton@...com>,
	Thavatchai Makphaibulchoke <thavatchai.makpahibulchoke@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/3] qspinlock: Introducing a 4-byte queue spinlock

On 02/19/2014 02:48 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 02:24:49PM -0500, Waiman Long wrote:
>> On 02/19/2014 03:51 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>> On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 07:42:20PM -0500, Waiman Long wrote:
>>>> On 02/18/2014 04:28 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 02:30:12PM -0500, Waiman Long wrote:
>>>>>> I will start looking at how to make it work with paravirt. Hopefully, it
>>>>>> won't take too long.
>>>>> The cheap way out is to simply switch to the test-and-set spinlock on
>>>>> whatever X86_FEATURE_ indicates a guest I suppose.
>>>> I don't think there is X86_FEATURE flag that indicates running in a guest.
>>>> In fact, a guest should never find out if it is running virtualized.
>>> No it very much should; how else is paravirt ever going to work?
>> We do have a CONFIG_PARAVIRT macro that turns on or off PV support. The
>> queue spinlock can be easily changed into an unfair lock which allows lock
>> stealing. We could have a config option to make it unfair in the PARAVIRT
>> environment, but I don't think Linus like the idea of an unfair lock.
> No; a guest is very much aware of paravirt. See for example the
> static_key_false(&paravirt_ticketlocks_enabled). It would be impossible
> to set that branch if you never knew you were a guest.

Yes, that is true for paravirt, but I was talking about virtualization 
in general.

-Longman
--
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/