[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190712123653.GO3419@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2019 14:36:53 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Alexandre Chartre <alexandre.chartre@...cle.com>
Cc: pbonzini@...hat.com, rkrcmar@...hat.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
mingo@...hat.com, bp@...en8.de, hpa@...or.com,
dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, luto@...nel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
x86@...nel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
konrad.wilk@...cle.com, jan.setjeeilers@...cle.com,
liran.alon@...cle.com, jwadams@...gle.com, graf@...zon.de,
rppt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 00/27] Kernel Address Space Isolation
On Fri, Jul 12, 2019 at 02:17:20PM +0200, Alexandre Chartre wrote:
> On 7/12/19 1:44 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > AFAIK3 this wants/needs to be combined with core-scheduling to be
> > useful, but not a single mention of that is anywhere.
>
> No. This is actually an alternative to core-scheduling. Eventually, ASI
> will kick all sibling hyperthreads when exiting isolation and it needs to
> run with the full kernel page-table (note that's currently not in these
> patches).
>
> So ASI can be seen as an optimization to disabling hyperthreading: instead
> of just disabling hyperthreading you run with ASI, and when ASI can't preserve
> isolation you will basically run with a single thread.
You can't do that without much of the scheduler changes present in the
core-scheduling patches.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists