On 01/29/18 10:26, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>>
>>> That will utterly suck on non-UMIP machines that have
>>> hypervisor-provided UMIP emulation.
>>
>> Is that a valid thing to optimize for, especially given that paranoid
>> entries aren't the most common anyway?
>
> A bunch of people seem to care about NMI performance for perf.
>
That wasn't really the question...
> And the current patch set works without this trick.
But I believe the tricks it uses are fragile.
> FWIW, if we switch all entries to the entry text trampoline, we get direct
> percpu access for free.
That might be a better option.
-hpa
