linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] x86: Move msr accesses out of line

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]

Date:	Mon, 23 Feb 2015 18:04:36 +0100
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Cc:	x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] x86: Move msr accesses out of line

On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 05:38:55PM -0800, Andi Kleen wrote:

> This patch moves the MSR functions out of line. A MSR access is typically
> 40-100 cycles or even slower, a call is a few cycles at best, so the
> additional function call is not really significant.

If I look at the below PDF a CALL+PUSH EBP+MOV RSP,RBP+ ... +POP+RET
ends up being 5+1.5+0.5+ .. + 1.5+8 = 16.5 + .. cycles.

~16 is fairly significant on 40. And I figure people are working hard to
make some MSR accesses cheaper, which means it'll be even worse in the
future.

Now I appreciate the intent for debuggability, but I don't think we can
do this unconditionally.


http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/architecture-and-technology/64-ia-32-architectures-optimization-manual.html
--
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/