Re: [PATCH] x86/asm/entry/64: better check for canonical address

[Borislav Petkov]

On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 08:41:15AM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> I was rather vague there.  Let me try again:
> 
> If anyone in the AMD camp really cared, we could add a new bug flag
> X86_BUG_SYSRET_NEEDS_CANONICAL_RCX and set it on Intel chips only, so
> we could use alternatives to patch out the check when running on
> sensible AMD hardware.  This would speed the slow path up by a couple
> of cycles on AMD chips.
> 
> Does that make more sense?  We could call it
> X86_BUG_SYSRET_NEEDS_CANONICAL_RIP if that makes more sense.

Actually "...NEEDS_CANONICAL_RCX" makes more sense as this is what we're
going to patch out eventually, if it makes sense - the RIP canonicalness
test is being done as part of SYSRET, just RCX is not being tested.

Tell you what - how about I perf stat this first by commenting out that
couple of instructions on AMD to see whether it brings anything.

Got an idea for a workload other than a kernel build? :-)

Although a kernel build should do a lot of syscalls too...

Thanks.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply.
--
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/