[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <8aee08a9-0d7a-4b5f-aee1-c70bad9433ca@suse.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2024 10:32:01 +0300
From: Nikolay Borisov <nik.borisov@...e.com>
To: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...nel.org>, x86@...nel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Daniel Sneddon <daniel.sneddon@...ux.intel.com>,
Pawan Gupta <pawan.kumar.gupta@...ux.intel.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Alexandre Chartre <alexandre.chartre@...cle.com>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, KP Singh <kpsingh@...nel.org>,
Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] x86/bugs: Only harden syscalls when needed
On 12.04.24 г. 21:10 ч., Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> Syscall hardening (i.e., converting the syscall indirect branch to a
> series of direct branches) may cause performance regressions in certain
> scenarios. Only use the syscall hardening when indirect branches are
> considered unsafe.
>
> Fixes: 1e3ad78334a6 ("x86/syscall: Don't force use of indirect calls for system calls")
> Signed-off-by: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...nel.org>
> ---
> arch/x86/entry/common.c | 15 ++++++++++++---
> arch/x86/entry/syscall_32.c | 11 +----------
> arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c | 6 ------
> arch/x86/entry/syscall_x32.c | 7 ++++++-
> arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h | 1 +
> arch/x86/include/asm/syscall.h | 8 +++++++-
> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/bugs.c | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> 7 files changed, 57 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
>
To ask again, what do we gain by having this syscall hardening at the
same time as the always on BHB scrubbing sequence?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists