linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] pmem, dax: clean up clear

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:	Thu, 22 Oct 2015 15:29:33 -0700
From:	Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
To:	Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@...hat.com>
Cc:	Jens Axboe <axboe@...com>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
	linux-nvdimm <linux-nvdimm@...1.01.org>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
	david <david@...morbit.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] pmem, dax: clean up clear_pmem()

On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 1:48 PM, Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@...hat.com> wrote:
> Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com> writes:
>
>> Both, __dax_pmd_fault, and clear_pmem() were taking special steps to
>> clear memory a page at a time to take advantage of non-temporal
>> clear_page() implementations.  However, x86_64 does not use
>> non-temporal instructions for clear_page(), and arch_clear_pmem() was
>> always incurring the cost of __arch_wb_cache_pmem().
>>
>> Clean up the assumption that doing clear_pmem() a page at a time is more
>> performant.
>
> Wouldn't another solution be to actually use non-temporal stores?

Sure.

> Why did you choose to punt?

Just a priority call at this point.  Patches welcome of course ;-).
--
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/