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: <20190806183333.GA4698@zn.tnic>
Date:   Tue, 6 Aug 2019 20:33:33 +0200
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:     Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@...el.com>
Cc:     tglx@...utronix.de, fenghua.yu@...el.com, tony.luck@...el.com,
        kuo-lang.tseng@...el.com, mingo@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com,
        x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 01/10] x86/CPU: Expose if cache is inclusive of lower
 level caches

On Tue, Aug 06, 2019 at 11:13:22AM -0700, Reinette Chatre wrote:
> Some platforms being enabled in this round have SKUs with inclusive
> cache and also SKUs with non-inclusive cache. The non-inclusive cache
> SKUs do not support cache pseudo-locking and cannot be made to support
> cache pseudo-locking with software changes. Needing to know if cache is
> inclusive or not will thus remain a requirement to distinguish between
> these different SKUs. Supporting cache pseudo-locking on platforms with
> non inclusive cache will require new hardware features.

Is there another way/CPUID bit or whatever to tell us whether the
platform supports cache pseudo-locking or is the cache inclusivity the
only one?

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ