[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1807191436300.1602@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 14:37:35 +0200 (CEST)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>
cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, x86@...nel.org,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>,
Kai Huang <kai.huang@...ux.intel.com>,
Jacob Pan <jacob.jun.pan@...ux.intel.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv5 08/19] x86/mm: Introduce variables to store number,
shift and mask of KeyIDs
On Thu, 19 Jul 2018, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 04:19:10PM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
> > > } else {
> > > /*
> > > * Reset __PHYSICAL_MASK.
> > > @@ -591,6 +592,9 @@ static void detect_tme(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
> > > * between CPUs.
> > > */
> > > physical_mask = (1ULL << __PHYSICAL_MASK_SHIFT) - 1;
> > > + mktme_keyid_mask = 0;
> > > + mktme_keyid_shift = 0;
> > > + mktme_nr_keyids = 0;
> > > }
> >
> > Should be unnecessary. These are zeroed by the compiler.
>
> No. detect_tme() called for each CPU in the system.
And then the variables are cleared out while other CPUs can access them?
How is that supposed to work?
Thanks,
tglx
Powered by blists - more mailing lists