[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190506213948.GA124959@romley-ivt3.sc.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 6 May 2019 14:39:49 -0700
From: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
H Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@...el.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ravi V Shankar <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>,
Xiaoyao Li <xiaoyao.li@...el.com>,
Christopherson Sean J <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>,
Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org>,
Michael Chan <michael.chan@...adcom.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
x86 <x86@...nel.org>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 13/15] x86/split_lock: Enable split lock detection by
default
On Thu, Apr 25, 2019 at 09:50:20AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Apr 2019, Fenghua Yu wrote:
> >
> > +static void split_lock_update_msr(void)
> > +{
> > + /* Enable split lock detection */
> > + msr_set_bit(MSR_TEST_CTL, TEST_CTL_SPLIT_LOCK_DETECT_SHIFT);
> > + this_cpu_or(msr_test_ctl_cache, TEST_CTL_SPLIT_LOCK_DETECT);
>
> I'm pretty sure, that I told you to utilize the cache proper. Again:
>
> > > Nothing in this file initializes msr_test_ctl_cache explicitely. Register
> > > caching always requires to read the register and store it in the cache
> > > before doing anything with it. Nothing guarantees that all bits in that MSR
> > > are 0 by default forever.
> > >
> > > And once you do that _before_ calling split_lock_update_msr() then you can
> > > spare the RMW in that function.
>
> So you managed to fix the initializaiton part, but then you still do a
> pointless RMW.
Ok. I see. msr_set_bit() is a RMW operation.
So is the following the right code to update msr and cache variable?
+static void split_lock_update_msr(void)
+{
+ /* Enable split lock detection */
+ this_cpu_or(msr_test_ctl_cache, TEST_CTL_SPLIT_LOCK_DETECT);
+ wrmsrl(MSR_TEST_CTL, msr_test_ctl_cache);
Thanks.
-Fenghua
Powered by blists - more mailing lists