linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86: Use cpu_feature_enabled() for PKU instead of #ifdef

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]

Date:   Fri, 2 Jun 2023 13:58:05 -0700
From:   Mingwei Zhang <mizhang@...gle.com>
To:     Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>
Cc:     Jon Kohler <jon@...anix.com>,
        Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        "kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86: Use cpu_feature_enabled() for PKU instead of #ifdef

>
> As we move towards enabling PKRU on the host, due to some customer
> requests, I have to wonder if PKRU-disabled is the norm.
>
> In other words, is this a likely() or unlikely() optimization?

I think it should be likely() as PKU was introduced very early in the
Skylake-SP server cores many years ago. Today I think all recent
client CPUs should have PKU on default if I am not mistaken. So yeah,
adding a likely() probably should help prevent the compiler from
evicting this code chunk to the end of function.

Thanks.
-Mingwei