[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALMp9eTtB1te3kyHxZjm244BwdVKrVrjOTgiLufQFwD8Y2g_LQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2018 09:30:17 -0700
From: Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>
Cc: Julian Stecklina <jsteckli@...zon.de>,
kvm list <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>, js@...en8.de,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] kvm, vmx: move register clearing out of assembly path
On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 8:46 AM, Sean Christopherson
<sean.j.christopherson@...el.com> wrote:
> Since clearing the GPRs exists to mitigate speculation junk, I think
> we should keep the explicit XOR zeroing instead of deferring to the
> compiler. Explicit XORs will ensure the resulting assembly is the
> same regardless of compiler, version, target arch, etc..., whereas the
> compiler could theoretically use different zeroing methods[1], e.g. on
> my system it generates "mov r32,r32" for EBX, ESI and EDI (loading
> from EAX after EAX is zeroed).
>
> And FWIW, I find the original code to be more readable since all GRPs
> are zeroed with the same method.
I concur. I really do prefer the explicit xors to the input arguments.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists