linux-kernel - Re: [6.5.0-rc1] unchecked MSR access error: RDMSR from 0xe2 at rIP: 0xffffffff87090227 (native_read_msr+0x7/0x40) (intel_idle_init_cstates

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: <20230714220220.GC3273303@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date:   Sat, 15 Jul 2023 00:02:20 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:     Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     "Wysocki, Rafael J" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
        Bruno Goncalves <bgoncalv@...hat.com>, x86@...nel.org,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [6.5.0-rc1] unchecked MSR access error: RDMSR from 0xe2 at rIP:
 0xffffffff87090227 (native_read_msr+0x7/0x40) (intel_idle_init_cstates_icpu)

On Fri, Jul 14, 2023 at 02:47:24PM -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:

> > I still don't know why this needs to be in intel_idle.
> 
> we can do a seperate idle driver; it'll still be x86 specific (since
> idle really is arch specific)...  and then the umwait parts of this
> will be Intel specific.. as well any future idle methods ..  and I'm
> not sure the AMD folks would even want it used .... at which point it
> ends up Intel specific fully and we now have 2 Intel idle drivers.  I
> don't see how that makes sense.

intel-idle is huge, the last thing it needs is yet another little driver
hidding inside it.

Creating a new simple and small x86-guest cpuidle driver seems, well,
simpler.

And the whole umwait / mwaitx thing really isn't that hard, this is all
indirect functions anyway. All that thing needs to do is amortize the
VMEXIT cost.