linux-kernel - RE: [RFC PATCH] x86/cpufeatures: Enumerate new AVX512 bfloat16 instructions

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: <3E5A0FA7E9CA944F9D5414FEC6C712209D8F4253@ORSMSX106.amr.corp.intel.com>
Date:   Wed, 12 Jun 2019 03:29:57 +0000
From:   "Yu, Fenghua" <fenghua.yu@...el.com>
To:     Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
CC:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        "H Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        "Shankar, Ravi V" <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, x86 <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: RE: [RFC PATCH] x86/cpufeatures: Enumerate new AVX512 bfloat16
 instructions

> On Tuesday, June 11, 2019 3:28 PM, Fenghua Yu wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 09:47:02PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 11:19:20AM -0700, Fenghua Yu wrote:
> > > So can I re-organize word 11 and 12 as follows?
> > >
> > > 1. Change word 11 to host scattered features.
> > > 2. Move the previos features in word 11 and word 12 to word 11:
> > > /*
> > >  * Extended auxiliary flags: Linux defined - For features scattered
> > > in various
> > >  * CPUID levels and sub-leaves like CPUID level 7 and sub-leaf 1, etc,
> word 19.
> > >  */
> > > #define X86_FEATURE_CQM_LLC             (11*32+ 0) /* LLC QoS if 1 */
> > > #define X86_FEATURE_CQM_OCCUP_LLC       (11*32+ 1) /* LLC
> occupancy monitoring */
> > > #define X86_FEATURE_CQM_MBM_TOTAL       (11*32+ 2) /* LLC Total
> MBM monitoring */
> > > #define X86_FEATURE_CQM_MBM_LOCAL       (11*32+ 3) /* LLC Local
> MBM monitoring */
> >
> > Yap.
> >
> > > 3. Change word 12 to host CPUID.(EAX=7,ECX=1):EAX:
> > > /* Intel-defined CPU features, CPUID level 0x7:1 (EAX), word 12 */
> > > #define X86_FEATURE_AVX512_BF16         (12*32+ 0) /* BFLOAT16
> instructions */
> >
> > This needs to be (12*32+ 5) if word 12 is going to map leaf
> > CPUID.(EAX=7,ECX=1):EAX.
> >
> > At least judging from the arch extensions doc which lists EAX as:
> >
> > Bits 04-00: Reserved.
> > Bit 05: AVX512_BF16. Vector Neural Network Instructions supporting
> BFLOAT16 inputs and conversion instructions from IEEE single precision.
> > Bits 31-06: Reserved.
> 
> Yes, you are absolutely right. I'll defint it as (12*32+ 5).
> 
> >
> > > 4. Do other necessary changes to match the new word 11 and word 12.
> >
> > But split in two patches: first does steps 1+2, second patch adds the
> > new leaf to word 12.
> 
> There are two varialbes defined in cpuinfo_x86: x86_cache_max_rmid and
> x86_cache_occ_scale. c->x86_cache_max_rmid is read from CPUID.0xf.1:ECX
> and c->x86_cache_occ_scale is read from CPUID.0xf.1:EBX.
> 
> After getting X86_FEATURE_CQM_* from scattered, the two variables need
> to be read from CPUID again. So the code of reading the two variables need
> to be moved from before init_scattered_cpuid_features(c) to after the
> function. This make the get_cpu_cap() code awkward.
> 
> And the two variables are ONLY used in resctrl monitoring configuration.
> There is no need to store them in cpuinfo_x86 on each CPU.
> 
> I'm thinking to simplify and clean this part of code:
> 
> 1. In patch #1:
> - remove the definitions of x86_cache_max_rmid and x86_cache_occ_scale
> from cpuinfo_x86
> - remove assignment of c->x86_cache_max_rmid and c-
> >x86_cache_occ_scale from get_cpu_cap(c)
> - get r->mon_scale and r->num_rmid in rdt_get_mon_l3_config(r) directly
> from CPUID.0xf.1:EBX and CPUID.0xf.1:ECX.
> 2. In patch #2: do steps 1+2 to recycle word 11. After patch #1, I can totally
> remove the code to get c->x86_cache_max_rmd and
> c->x86_cache_occ_scale in get_cpu_cap(c). And patch #2 is cleaner.
> 3. In patch #3: add new word 12 to host CPUID.7.1:EAX
> 
> Do you think the patch #1 is necessary and this is a right patch set?

My bad. I studied a bit more and found the patch #1 is not needed. Please ignore my last email.
 
Thanks.
 
-Fenghua