linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] x86/kvm: Provide optimized version of vcpu_is

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]

Message-ID: <9c101df4-7320-556a-ca41-e024629e9a67@redhat.com>
Date:   Thu, 16 Feb 2017 16:00:10 -0500
From:   Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
        Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>,
        Alok Kataria <akataria@...are.com>,
        Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
        x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
        xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        Pan Xinhui <xinhui.pan@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
        Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
        Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>, andrew.cooper3@...rix.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] x86/kvm: Provide optimized version of
 vcpu_is_preempted() for x86-64

On 02/16/2017 11:48 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 04:37:50PM -0500, Waiman Long wrote:
>> +/*
>> + * Hand-optimize version for x86-64 to avoid 8 64-bit register saving and
>> + * restoring to/from the stack. It is assumed that the preempted value
>> + * is at an offset of 16 from the beginning of the kvm_steal_time structure
>> + * which is verified by the BUILD_BUG_ON() macro below.
>> + */
>> +#define PREEMPTED_OFFSET	16
> As per Andrew's suggestion, the 'right' way is something like so.

Thanks for the tip. I was not aware of the asm-offsets stuff. I will
update the patch to use it.

Cheers,
Longman