linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 0/5] RISC-V: Add dynamic TSO support

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: <ZWM7VvHNkW2iIRCg@gmail.com>
Date:   Sun, 26 Nov 2023 07:34:30 -0500
From:   Guo Ren <guoren@...nel.org>
To:     Jonas Oberhauser <jonas.oberhauser@...weicloud.com>
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Christoph Muellner <christoph.muellner@...ll.eu>,
        linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
        Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
        Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Anup Patel <apatel@...tanamicro.com>,
        Philipp Tomsich <philipp.tomsich@...ll.eu>,
        Andrew Jones <ajones@...tanamicro.com>,
        Daniel Henrique Barboza <dbarboza@...tanamicro.com>,
        Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@...rochip.com>,
        Björn Töpel <bjorn@...osinc.com>,
        Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
        Andrea Parri <parri.andrea@...il.com>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Lustig <dlustig@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/5] RISC-V: Add dynamic TSO support

On Fri, Nov 24, 2023 at 12:54:30PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 24, 2023 at 12:04:09PM +0100, Jonas Oberhauser wrote:
> 
> > > I think ARM64 approached this problem by adding the
> > > load-acquire/store-release instructions and for TSO based code,
> > > translate into those (eg. x86 -> arm64 transpilers).
> > 
> > 
> > Although those instructions have a bit more ordering constraints.
> > 
> > I have heard rumors that the apple chips also have a register that can be
> > set at runtime.
I could understand the rumor, smart design! Thx for sharing.

> 
> Oh, I thought they made do with the load-acquire/store-release thingies.
> But to be fair, I haven't been paying *that* much attention to the apple
> stuff.
> 
> I did read about how they fudged some of the x86 flags thing.
> 
> > And there are some IBM machines that have a setting, but not sure how it is
> > controlled.
> 
> Cute, I'm assuming this is the Power series (s390 already being TSO)? I
> wasn't aware they had this.
> 
> > > IIRC Risc-V actually has such instructions as well, so *why* are you
> > > doing this?!?!
> > 
> > 
> > Unfortunately, at least last time I checked RISC-V still hadn't gotten such
> > instructions.
> > What they have is the *semantics* of the instructions, but no actual opcodes
> > to encode them.
> 
> Well, that sucks..
> 
> > I argued for them in the RISC-V memory group, but it was considered to be
> > outside the scope of that group.
> > 
> > Transpiling with sufficient DMB ISH to get the desired ordering is really
> > bad for performance.
> 
> Ha!, quite dreadful I would imagine.
> 
> > That is not to say that linux should support this. Perhaps linux should
> > pressure RISC-V into supporting implicit barriers instead.
> 
> I'm not sure I count for much in this regard, but yeah, that sounds like
> a plan :-)
>