linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 05/17] x86/cpu/intel: Fix page copy performance for extended Families

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: <445ccf10-5ac8-42aa-ba09-5f4ba689ec19@citrix.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2025 23:02:07 +0000
From: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com>
To: Sohil Mehta <sohil.mehta@...el.com>, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
 x86@...nel.org, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
 Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
 Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
 Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
 Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
 Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>, Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>,
 Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
 Kan Liang <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
 Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
 "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>, Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
 Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
 Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>, Jean Delvare <jdelvare@...e.com>,
 Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>, Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@...el.com>,
 David Laight <david.laight.linux@...il.com>,
 linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-hwmon@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 05/17] x86/cpu/intel: Fix page copy performance for
 extended Families

On 12/02/2025 9:19 pm, Sohil Mehta wrote:
> Check 1 (Based on Family Model numbers):
>> /*
>>  * Unconditionally set REP_GOOD on early Family 6 processors
>>  */
>> if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_X86_64) &&
>>     (c->x86_vfm >= INTEL_PENTIUM_PRO && c->x86_vfm < INTEL_PENTIUM_M_DOTHAN))
>> 	set_cpu_cap(c, X86_FEATURE_REP_GOOD);
> This check is mostly redundant since it is targeted for 64 bit and very
> few if any of those CPUs support 64 bit processing. I suggest that we
> get rid of this check completely. The risk here is fairly limited as well.

PENTIUM_PRO is model 0x1.  M_DOTHAN isn't introduced until patch 10, but
is model 0xd.

And model 0xf (Memron) is the first 64bit capable fam6 CPU, so this is
dead code given the CONFIG_X86_64 which the compiler can't actually
optimise out.

>
> Check 2 (Based on MISC_ENABLE.FAST_STRING):
>> /*
>>  * If fast string is not enabled in IA32_MISC_ENABLE for any reason,
>>  * clear the fast string and enhanced fast string CPU capabilities.

I'd suggest that a better way of phrasing this is:

/* BIOSes typically have a knob for Fast Strings.  Honour the user's
wishes. */

>>  */
>> if (c->x86_vfm >= INTEL_PENTIUM_M_DOTHAN) {
>> 	rdmsrl(MSR_IA32_MISC_ENABLE, misc_enable);
>> 	if (misc_enable & MSR_IA32_MISC_ENABLE_FAST_STRING) {
>> 		/* X86_FEATURE_ERMS will be automatically set based on CPUID */
>> 		set_cpu_cap(c, X86_FEATURE_REP_GOOD);
>> 	} else {
>> 		pr_info("Disabled fast string operations\n");
>> 		setup_clear_cpu_cap(X86_FEATURE_REP_GOOD);
>> 		setup_clear_cpu_cap(X86_FEATURE_ERMS);
>> 	}
>> }

MSR_MISC_ENABLE exists on all 64bit CPUs, and some 32bit ones too. 
Therefore, this section alone seems to suffice in order to set up
REP_GOOD properly.

~Andrew