* Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Nov 2018, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> > > On Nov 25, 2018, at 2:20 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > On Sun, 25 Nov 2018, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > >
> > >>> The current check whether two tasks belong to the same context is using
> > >>> the
> > >>> tasks
* Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Nov 2018, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> > > On Nov 25, 2018, at 2:20 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > > On Sun, 25 Nov 2018, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > >
> > >>> The current check whether two tasks belong to the same context is using
> > >>> the
> > >>> tasks
On Sun, 25 Nov 2018, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> > On Nov 25, 2018, at 2:20 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Sun, 25 Nov 2018, Andi Kleen wrote:
> >
> >>> The current check whether two tasks belong to the same context is using
> >>> the
> >>> tasks context id. While correct, it's simpler to use
On Sun, 25 Nov 2018, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> > On Nov 25, 2018, at 2:20 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Sun, 25 Nov 2018, Andi Kleen wrote:
> >
> >>> The current check whether two tasks belong to the same context is using
> >>> the
> >>> tasks context id. While correct, it's simpler to use
On Sun, 25 Nov 2018, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 25, 2018 at 11:20:50PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Sun, 25 Nov 2018, Andi Kleen wrote:
> >
> > > > The current check whether two tasks belong to the same context is using
> > > > the
> > > > tasks context id. While correct, it's
On Sun, 25 Nov 2018, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 25, 2018 at 11:20:50PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Sun, 25 Nov 2018, Andi Kleen wrote:
> >
> > > > The current check whether two tasks belong to the same context is using
> > > > the
> > > > tasks context id. While correct, it's
On Sun, Nov 25, 2018 at 11:20:50PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Nov 2018, Andi Kleen wrote:
>
> > > The current check whether two tasks belong to the same context is using
> > > the
> > > tasks context id. While correct, it's simpler to use the mm pointer
> > > because
> > > it
On Sun, Nov 25, 2018 at 11:20:50PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Nov 2018, Andi Kleen wrote:
>
> > > The current check whether two tasks belong to the same context is using
> > > the
> > > tasks context id. While correct, it's simpler to use the mm pointer
> > > because
> > > it
> On Nov 25, 2018, at 2:20 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>
> On Sun, 25 Nov 2018, Andi Kleen wrote:
>
>>> The current check whether two tasks belong to the same context is using the
>>> tasks context id. While correct, it's simpler to use the mm pointer because
>>> it allows to mangle the
> On Nov 25, 2018, at 2:20 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>
> On Sun, 25 Nov 2018, Andi Kleen wrote:
>
>>> The current check whether two tasks belong to the same context is using the
>>> tasks context id. While correct, it's simpler to use the mm pointer because
>>> it allows to mangle the
On Sun, 25 Nov 2018, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > The current check whether two tasks belong to the same context is using the
> > tasks context id. While correct, it's simpler to use the mm pointer because
> > it allows to mangle the TIF_SPEC_IB bit into it. The context id based
> > mechanism requires
On Sun, 25 Nov 2018, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > The current check whether two tasks belong to the same context is using the
> > tasks context id. While correct, it's simpler to use the mm pointer because
> > it allows to mangle the TIF_SPEC_IB bit into it. The context id based
> > mechanism requires
> The current check whether two tasks belong to the same context is using the
> tasks context id. While correct, it's simpler to use the mm pointer because
> it allows to mangle the TIF_SPEC_IB bit into it. The context id based
> mechanism requires extra storage, which creates worse code.
[We
> The current check whether two tasks belong to the same context is using the
> tasks context id. While correct, it's simpler to use the mm pointer because
> it allows to mangle the TIF_SPEC_IB bit into it. The context id based
> mechanism requires extra storage, which creates worse code.
[We
On Sun, 25 Nov 2018, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> /*
> + * Use bit 0 to mangle the TIF_SPEC_IB state into the mm pointer which is
> + * stored in cpu_tlb_state.last_user_mm_ibpb.
> + */
> +#define LAST_USER_MM_IBPB0x1UL
> +
> +/*
> + unsigned long next_tif = task_thread_info(next)->flags;
> +
On Sun, 25 Nov 2018, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> /*
> + * Use bit 0 to mangle the TIF_SPEC_IB state into the mm pointer which is
> + * stored in cpu_tlb_state.last_user_mm_ibpb.
> + */
> +#define LAST_USER_MM_IBPB0x1UL
> +
> +/*
> + unsigned long next_tif = task_thread_info(next)->flags;
> +
The IBPB speculation barrier is issued from switch_mm() when the kernel
switches to a user space task with a different mm than the user space task
which ran last on the same CPU.
An additional optimization is to avoid IBPB when the incoming task can be
ptraced by the outgoing task. This
The IBPB speculation barrier is issued from switch_mm() when the kernel
switches to a user space task with a different mm than the user space task
which ran last on the same CPU.
An additional optimization is to avoid IBPB when the incoming task can be
ptraced by the outgoing task. This
18 matches
Mail list logo
