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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <85acc922-2b76-3e52-1f77-c200949b0532@arm.com>
Date:   Mon, 31 Jul 2017 14:42:25 +0100
From:   Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>
To:     "Longpeng(Mike)" <longpeng2@...wei.com>, pbonzini@...hat.com,
        rkrcmar@...hat.com
Cc:     agraf@...e.com, borntraeger@...ibm.com, cohuck@...hat.com,
        christoffer.dall@...aro.org, james.hogan@...tec.com,
        kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        weidong.huang@...wei.com, arei.gonglei@...wei.com,
        wangxinxin.wang@...wei.com, longpeng.mike@...il.com
Subject: Re: [RFC] KVM: optimize the kvm_vcpu_on_spin

On 29/07/17 07:22, Longpeng(Mike) wrote:
> We had disscuss the idea here:
> https://www.spinics.net/lists/kvm/msg140593.html
> 
> I think it's also suitable for other architectures.
> 
> If the vcpu(me) exit due to request a usermode spinlock, then
> the spinlock-holder may be preempted in usermode or kernmode.
> But if the vcpu(me) is in kernmode, then the holder must be
> preempted in kernmode, so we should choose a vcpu in kernmode
> as the most eligible candidate.

That seems to preclude any form of locking between userspace and kernel
(which probably wouldn't be Linux). Are you sure that this form of
construct is not used anywhere? I have the feeling this patch could
break this scenario...

Thanks,

	M.
-- 
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ