linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] x86: Remove vendor checks from prefer_mwait_c1_over

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: <20220525165548.GJ2578@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:   Wed, 25 May 2022 18:55:48 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Wyes Karny <wyes.karny@....com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Lewis.Carroll@....com,
        Mario.Limonciello@....com, gautham.shenoy@....com,
        Ananth.Narayan@....com, bharata@....com, len.brown@...el.com,
        x86@...nel.org, tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, bp@...en8.de,
        dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, hpa@...or.com,
        chang.seok.bae@...el.com, keescook@...omium.org, metze@...ba.org,
        zhengqi.arch@...edance.com, mark.rutland@....com,
        rui.zhang@...el.com, puwen@...on.cn, rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com,
        andrew.cooper3@...rix.com, jing2.liu@...el.com,
        jmattson@...gle.com, pawan.kumar.gupta@...ux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] x86: Remove vendor checks from
 prefer_mwait_c1_over_halt

On Mon, May 23, 2022 at 10:25:50PM +0530, Wyes Karny wrote:

> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/process.c b/arch/x86/kernel/process.c
> index 4e0178b066c5..7bf4d73c9522 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/process.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/process.c
> @@ -813,28 +813,43 @@ static void amd_e400_idle(void)
>  }
>  
>  /*
> - * Intel Core2 and older machines prefer MWAIT over HALT for C1.
> - * We can't rely on cpuidle installing MWAIT, because it will not load
> - * on systems that support only C1 -- so the boot default must be MWAIT.
> + * Prefer MWAIT over HALT if MWAIT is supported, MWAIT_CPUID leaf
> + * exists and whenever MONITOR/MWAIT extensions are present there is at
> + * least one C1 substate.
>   *
> - * Some AMD machines are the opposite, they depend on using HALT.
> - *
> - * So for default C1, which is used during boot until cpuidle loads,
> - * use MWAIT-C1 on Intel HW that has it, else use HALT.
> + * Do not prefer MWAIT if MONITOR instruction has a bug or idle=nomwait
> + * is passed to kernel commandline parameter.
>   */
>  static int prefer_mwait_c1_over_halt(const struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
>  {
> +	u32 eax, ebx, ecx, edx;
> +
>  	/* User has disallowed the use of MWAIT. Fallback to HALT */
>  	if (boot_option_idle_override == IDLE_NOMWAIT)
>  		return 0;
>  
> -	if (c->x86_vendor != X86_VENDOR_INTEL)
> +	/* MWAIT is not supported on this platform. Fallback to HALT */
> +	if (!cpu_has(c, X86_FEATURE_MWAIT))
>  		return 0;
>  
> -	if (!cpu_has(c, X86_FEATURE_MWAIT) || boot_cpu_has_bug(X86_BUG_MONITOR))
> +	/* Monitor has a bug. Fallback to HALT */
> +	if (boot_cpu_has_bug(X86_BUG_MONITOR))
>  		return 0;
>  
> -	return 1;
> +	cpuid(CPUID_MWAIT_LEAF, &eax, &ebx, &ecx, &edx);
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * If MWAIT extensions are not available, it is safe to use MWAIT
> +	 * with EAX=0, ECX=0.
> +	 */
> +	if (!(ecx & CPUID5_ECX_EXTENSIONS_SUPPORTED))
> +		return 1;
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * If MWAIT extensions are available, there should be at least one
> +	 * MWAIT C1 substate present.
> +	 */
> +	return (edx & MWAIT_C1_SUBSTATE_MASK);
>  }

Seems reasonable enough to me,

Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@...radead.org>