[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140422144659.GF15882@pd.tnic>
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2014 16:46:59 +0200
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Andrew Lutomirski <amluto@...il.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...ux.intel.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Alexander van Heukelum <heukelum@...tmail.fm>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan.van.de.ven@...el.com>,
Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>,
Alexandre Julliard <julliard@...ehq.com>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86-64: espfix for 64-bit mode *PROTOTYPE*
On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 01:23:12PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> I wonder if it would be workable to use a bit in the espfix PGD to
> denote that it has been initialized already... I hear, near NX there's
> some room :-)
Ok, I realized this won't work when I hit send... Oh well.
Anyway, another dumb idea: have we considered making this lazy? I.e.,
preallocate pages to fit the stack of NR_CPUS after smp init is done but
not setup the percpu espfix stack. Only do that in espfix_fix_stack the
first time we land there and haven't been setup yet on this cpu.
This should cover the 1% out there who still use 16-bit segments and the
rest simply doesn't use it and get to save themselves the PT-walk in
start_secondary().
Hmmm...
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine.
--
--
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