[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAMj1kXEFykYgtHb0UaNQ5fk_0+q+ZHVJa4Gs8-v_Jq1_35-gEw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 19 May 2025 11:46:34 +0200
From: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb+git@...gle.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>, "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/6] x86/cpu: Use a new feature flag for 5 level paging
On Mon, 19 May 2025 at 11:41, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de> wrote:
>
> On Sat, May 17, 2025 at 11:16:41AM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h
> > index f67a93fc9391..5c19bee0af11 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h
> > +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h
> > @@ -395,7 +395,7 @@
> > #define X86_FEATURE_AVX512_BITALG (16*32+12) /* "avx512_bitalg" Support for VPOPCNT[B,W] and VPSHUF-BITQMB instructions */
> > #define X86_FEATURE_TME (16*32+13) /* "tme" Intel Total Memory Encryption */
> > #define X86_FEATURE_AVX512_VPOPCNTDQ (16*32+14) /* "avx512_vpopcntdq" POPCNT for vectors of DW/QW */
> > -#define X86_FEATURE_LA57 (16*32+16) /* "la57" 5-level page tables */
> > +#define X86_FEATURE_LA57 (16*32+16) /* 57-bit linear addressing */
> > #define X86_FEATURE_RDPID (16*32+22) /* "rdpid" RDPID instruction */
> > #define X86_FEATURE_BUS_LOCK_DETECT (16*32+24) /* "bus_lock_detect" Bus Lock detect */
> > #define X86_FEATURE_CLDEMOTE (16*32+25) /* "cldemote" CLDEMOTE instruction */
> > @@ -483,6 +483,7 @@
> > #define X86_FEATURE_PREFER_YMM (21*32+ 8) /* Avoid ZMM registers due to downclocking */
> > #define X86_FEATURE_APX (21*32+ 9) /* Advanced Performance Extensions */
> > #define X86_FEATURE_INDIRECT_THUNK_ITS (21*32+10) /* Use thunk for indirect branches in lower half of cacheline */
> > +#define X86_FEATURE_5LEVEL_PAGING (21*32+11) /* "la57" Whether 5 levels of page tables are in use */
>
> I don't think we need this second flag - you can simply clear the existing
> one.
That is what the old code does. It results in the flag transiently
being set and cleared again, which is what I am trying to avoid.
> Diff ontop below:
>
How is that not just a revert?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists