[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wgLCzEwa=S4hZFGeOPjix-1_fDrsqR-QLaBcDM-fgkvhw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2024 17:27:06 -0800
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...nel.org>
Cc: David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com>, "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Pawan Gupta <pawan.kumar.gupta@...ux.intel.com>, Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
"linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>, "Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/6] x86/uaccess: Avoid barrier_nospec() in 64-bit __get_user()
On Fri, 15 Nov 2024 at 15:06, Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> It's sad that __get_user() is now slower than get_user() on x86, it kind
> of defeats the whole point!
Well, honestly, we've been trying to get away from __get_user() and
__put_user() for a long long time.
With CLAC/STAC, it's been probably a decade or two since __get_user()
and friends were actually a worthwhile optimization, so let's just
strive to get rid of the ones that matter.
So I think the thing to do is
(a) find out which __get_user() it is that matters so much for that load
Do you have a profile somewhere?
(b) convert them to use "unsafe_get_user()", with that whole
if (can_do_masked_user_access())
from = masked_user_access_begin(from);
else if (!user_read_access_begin(from, sizeof(*from)))
return -EFAULT;
sequence before it.
And if it's just a single __get_user() (rather than a sequence of
them), just convert it to get_user().
Hmm?
Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists