linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 04/12] x86/mm: get INVLPGB count max from CPUID

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: <bc4f90fb76f82b54069b229291461d5e86a21090.camel@surriel.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2025 16:08:45 -0500
From: Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>
To: Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>, thomas.lendacky@....com
Cc: x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, bp@...en8.de, 
	peterz@...radead.org, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com,
 zhengqi.arch@...edance.com, 	nadav.amit@...il.com, kernel-team@...a.com,
 linux-mm@...ck.org, 	akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 04/12] x86/mm: get INVLPGB count max from CPUID

On Mon, 2025-01-13 at 16:50 +0100, Jann Horn wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 12, 2025 at 4:55 PM Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>
> wrote:
> > +       /* Max number of pages INVLPGB can invalidate in one shot
> > */
> > +       if (boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_INVLPGB)) {
> > +               cpuid(0x80000008, &eax, &ebx, &ecx, &edx);
> > +               invlpgb_count_max = (edx & 0xffff) + 1;
> 
> I assume the +1 is just a weird undocumented (or weirdly documented)
> encoding?
> https://www.amd.com/content/dam/amd/en/documents/processor-tech-docs/programmer-references/24594.pdf
> says that field InvlpgbCountMax contains the "Maximum page count for
> INVLPGB instruction" and doesn't mention having to add 1 from what I
> can tell.
> 
The way I read the documentation, the number
passed in to invlpgb (and retrieved from cpuid)
corresponds to the number of extra pages
invalidated beyond the first page at the specified
address.

Things have not exploded on me invalidating
multiple pages at once in larger ranges, so I 
suspect my reading is right, but it would be
nice for one of the AMD people to confirm :)

-- 
All Rights Reversed.