[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJvTdKm4qKw8D8b+NokBsdiE5yBj=LTiH50VuxJY2aAL8qQq6g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2021 12:06:38 -0400
From: Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: "Chang S. Bae" <chang.seok.bae@...el.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
"Brown, Len" <len.brown@...el.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
"Liu, Jing2" <jing2.liu@...el.com>,
"Ravi V. Shankar" <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 14/22] x86/fpu/xstate: Expand the xstate buffer on the
first use of dynamic user state
On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 11:43 AM Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 9:33 AM Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote:
>
> > > I found the author of this passage, and he agreed to revise it to say this
> > > was targeted primarily at VMMs.
> >
> > Why would this only a problem for VMMs?
>
> VMMs may have to emulate different hardware for different guest OS's,
> and they would likely "context switch" XCR0 to achieve that.
>
> As switching XCR0 at run-time would confuse the heck out of user-space,
> it was not imagined that a bare-metal OS would do that.
to clarify...
*switching* XCR0 on context switch is slow, but perfectly legal.
*changing* XCR0 during the lifetime of a process, in any of its tasks,
on any of its CPUs, will confuse any software that uses xgetbv/XCR0
to calculate the size of XSAVE buffers for userspace threading.
--
Len Brown, Intel Open Source Technology Center
Powered by blists - more mailing lists