Re: [PATCHv5 08/19] x86/mm: Introduce variables to store number, shift and mask of KeyIDs

[Thomas Gleixner]

On Thu, 19 Jul 2018, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 03:18:03PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Thu, 19 Jul 2018, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 02:37:35PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 19 Jul 2018, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 04:19:10PM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
> > > > > > >  	} else {
> > > > > > >  		/*
> > > > > > >  		 * Reset __PHYSICAL_MASK.
> > > > > > > @@ -591,6 +592,9 @@ static void detect_tme(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
> > > > > > >  		 * between CPUs.
> > > > > > >  		 */
> > > > > > >  		physical_mask = (1ULL << __PHYSICAL_MASK_SHIFT) - 1;
> > > > > > > +		mktme_keyid_mask = 0;
> > > > > > > +		mktme_keyid_shift = 0;
> > > > > > > +		mktme_nr_keyids = 0;
> > > > > > >  	}
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Should be unnecessary.  These are zeroed by the compiler.
> > > > > 
> > > > > No. detect_tme() called for each CPU in the system.
> > > > 
> > > > And then the variables are cleared out while other CPUs can access them?
> > > > How is that supposed to work?
> > > 
> > > This code path only matter in patalogical case: when MKTME configuation is
> > > inconsitent between CPUs. Basically if BIOS screwed things up we disable
> > > MKTME.
> > 
> > I still don't see how that's supposed to work.
> > 
> > When the inconsistent CPU is brought up _AFTER_ MKTME is enabled, then how
> > does clearing the variables help? It does not magically make all the other
> > stuff go away.
> 
> We don't actually enable MKTME in kernel. BIOS does. Kernel makes choose
> to use it or not. Current design targeted to be used by userspace.
> So until init we don't have any other stuff to go away. We can just
> pretend that MKTME was never there.

Hotplug is not guaranteed to happen _BEFORE_ init. Think about physical
hotplug.

Thanks,

	tglx