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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1906231431340.32342@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>
Date:   Sun, 23 Jun 2019 14:37:47 +0200 (CEST)
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:     Nadav Amit <namit@...are.com>
cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, x86@...nel.org,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Richard Henderson <rth@...ddle.net>,
        Ivan Kokshaysky <ink@...assic.park.msu.ru>,
        Matt Turner <mattst88@...il.com>,
        Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
        Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/9] x86: Concurrent TLB flushes and other improvements

Nadav,

On Wed, 12 Jun 2019, Nadav Amit wrote:

> Patch 1 does small cleanup. Patches 2-5 implement the concurrent
> execution of TLB flushes. Patches 6-9 deal with false-sharing and
> unnecessary atomic operations. There is still no implementation that
> uses the concurrent TLB flushes by Xen and Hyper-V. 

I've picked up the patches which make sense independent of the TLB
optimization. So they are out of your way :)

> There are various additional possible optimizations that were sent or
> are in development (async flushes, x2apic shorthands, fewer mm_tlb_gen
> accesses, etc.), but based on Andy's feedback, they will be sent later.

Vs. x2apic shorthands. It's not only x2apic. We generally do not make use
of shorthands when CPU hotplug is enabled as that needs some deep care
vs. the state whether a present CPU had been brought up at least once,
similar to the MCE issue which causes us to do the online/offlie dance for
SMT control at boot. There are a few other nasty details like the APIC
state on CPU hot unplug and NMI shorthands.

I have a WIP series in the pipeline which I'm going to post soon. I'll put
you on CC.

For the TLB related parts, I delegate the review happily to our x86 mm/tlb
wizards. Hint, hint ...

Thanks,

	tglx

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ