[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3908561D78D1C84285E8C5FCA982C28F7F54F399@ORSMSX114.amr.corp.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2020 17:35:33 +0000
From: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
CC: Arvind Sankar <nivedita@...m.mit.edu>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"Christopherson, Sean J" <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
"Yu, Fenghua" <fenghua.yu@...el.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"Borislav Petkov" <bp@...en8.de>, H Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com>,
"Raj, Ashok" <ashok.raj@...el.com>,
"Shankar, Ravi V" <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, x86 <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v15] x86/split_lock: Enable split lock detection by
kernel
> Have you found any actual bad software ? The only way I could trigger
> was by explicitly writing a program to tickle it.
No application or library issues found so far (though I'm not running the kind of multi-threaded
applications that might be using atomic operations for synchronization).
Only Linux kernel seems to have APIs that make it easy for programmers to accidently split
an atomic operation between cache lines.
-Tony
Powered by blists - more mailing lists