linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/4] x86, perf: Use a new PMU ack sequence on Skylake

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20151019070812.GB17855@gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 19 Oct 2015 09:08:12 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>, Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] x86, perf: Use a new PMU ack sequence on Skylake


* Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:

> On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 06:35:14AM -0700, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > > In principle the sequence should work on other CPUs too, but
> > > > since I only tested on Skylake it is only enabled there.
> > > 
> > > I would very much like a reduction of the ack states. You introduced the 
> > > late thing, which should also work for everyone, and now you introduce yet 
> > > another variant.
> > 
> > Ingo suggested to do it this way. Originally I thought it wasn't needed, but I 
> > think now that late-ack made some of the races that eventually caused Skylake 
> > LBR to fall over worse. So in hindsight it was a good idea to not use it 
> > everywhere.
> > 
> > > I would very much prefer a single ack scheme if at all possible.
> > 
> > Could enable it everywhere, but then users would need to test it on most types 
> > of CPUs, as I can't.
> 
> I think Mike still has a Core2 machine (and I might be able to dig out a 
> laptop), Ingo should have a NHM(-EP), I have SNB, IVB-EP, HSW. So if you could 
> test at least BDW and SKL we might have decent test coverage.
> 
> Ingo, do you want to first merge the safe patch and then clean up?

Yeah, would be nice to structure it that way, out of general paranoia.

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
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/