[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150427184730.GH28871@pd.tnic>
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2015 20:47:30 +0200
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Denys Vlasenko <vda.linux@...glemail.com>,
Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...mgrid.com>,
Will Drewry <wad@...omium.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86_64, asm: Work around AMD SYSRET SS descriptor
attribute issue
On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 11:12:05AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> So if one or two cycles in this code doesn't matter, then why are we
> adding alternate instructions just to avoid a few ALU instructions and
> a conditional branch that predicts perfectly? And if it does matter,
> then the 6-byte option looks clearly better..
You know what? I haven't even measured the tree *without* Denys'
stricter RCX canonical-ness patch. All numbers so far are from 4.0+ with
tip/master ontop which has Denys' patch.
And I *should* measure once with plain 4.1-rc1 and then with Denys'
patch ontop to see whether this all jumping-thru-alternatives-hoops is
even worth it.
If nothing else, it was a nice exercise. :-)
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply.
--
--
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