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: <8736k49c57.fsf@firstfloor.org>
Date:   Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:31:48 -0700
From:   Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To:     Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
Cc:     Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>, Nadav Amit <namit@...are.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>,
        Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@....com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        "Kleen\, Andi" <andi.kleen@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] resource: Introduce resource cache

Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com> writes:
>
> The underlying issue is that the x86-PAT implementation wants to
> ensure that conflicting mappings are not set up for the same physical
> address. This is mentioned in the developer manuals as problematic on
> some cpus. Andi, is lookup_memtype() and track_pfn_insert() still
> relevant?

There have been discussions about it in the past, and the right answer
will likely differ for different CPUs: But so far the official answer
for Intel CPUs is that these caching conflicts should be avoided.

So I guess the cache in the original email makes sense for now.

-Andi

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ