[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20201218041012.GC2506510@iweiny-DESK2.sc.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2020 20:10:12 -0800
From: Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>
To: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [NEEDS-REVIEW] [PATCH V3 04/10] x86/pks: Preserve the PKRS MSR
on context switch
On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 12:41:50PM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 11/6/20 3:29 PM, ira.weiny@...el.com wrote:
> > void disable_TSC(void)
> > @@ -644,6 +668,8 @@ void __switch_to_xtra(struct task_struct *prev_p, struct task_struct *next_p)
> >
> > if ((tifp ^ tifn) & _TIF_SLD)
> > switch_to_sld(tifn);
> > +
> > + pks_sched_in();
> > }
>
> Does the selftest for this ever actually schedule()?
At this point I'm not sure. This code has been in since the beginning. So its
seen a lot of soak time.
>
> I see it talking about context switching, but I don't immediately see
> how it would.
We were trying to force parent and child to run on the same CPU. I suspect
something is wrong in the timing of that test.
Ira
Powered by blists - more mailing lists