On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 11:47 AM, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 12/11/2017 11:39 AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>> I thought there would be a "fast path" where we just use the normal
>>> clear_LDT() LDT from the cpu_entry_area and don't have to do any of
>>> this, but I'm missing where that happens. Do we
On 12/11/2017 11:39 AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> I thought there would be a "fast path" where we just use the normal
>> clear_LDT() LDT from the cpu_entry_area and don't have to do any of
>> this, but I'm missing where that happens. Do we need a check in
>> (un)map_ldt_struct() for !mm->context.l
On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 11:32 AM, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 12/11/2017 10:40 AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>> Also, from a high level, this does increase the overhead of KPTI in a
>>> non-trivial way, right? It costs us three more page table pages per
>>> process allocated at fork() and freed at exit
On 12/11/2017 10:40 AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> Also, from a high level, this does increase the overhead of KPTI in a
>> non-trivial way, right? It costs us three more page table pages per
>> process allocated at fork() and freed at exit() and a new TLB flush.
> Yeah, but no one will care. modi
On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 9:49 AM, Dave Hansen wrote:
> So, before this,
>
> On 12/10/2017 10:47 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> ...> + if (unlikely(ldt)) {
>> + if (static_cpu_has_bug(X86_BUG_CPU_SECURE_MODE_PTI)) {
>> + if (WARN_ON_ONCE((unsigned long)ldt->slot > 1))
So, before this,
On 12/10/2017 10:47 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
...> + if (unlikely(ldt)) {
> + if (static_cpu_has_bug(X86_BUG_CPU_SECURE_MODE_PTI)) {
> + if (WARN_ON_ONCE((unsigned long)ldt->slot > 1)) {
> + clear_LDT();
> +
6 matches
Mail list logo