From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Dave Hansen <dave@sr71.net>
Cc: dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
bp@alien8.de, fenghua.yu@intel.com, hpa@zytor.com,
x86@kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86, fpu: correct XSAVE xstate size calculation
Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2015 12:32:27 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150805103227.GA3233@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150728172143.6DDFECA7@viggo.jf.intel.com>
* Dave Hansen <dave@sr71.net> wrote:
>
> From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
>
> Note: our xsaves support is currently broken and disabled. This
> patch does not fix it, but it is an incremental improvement. It
> might be useful to someone backporting the entire set of XSAVES
> patches at some point, but it should not be backported alone.
>
> There are currently two xsave buffer formats: standard and
> compacted. The standard format is waht 'XSAVE' and 'XSAVEOPT'
> produce while 'XSAVES' and 'XSAVEC' produce a compacted-formet
> buffer. (The kernel never uses XSAVEC)
>
> But, the XSAVES buffer *ALSO* contains "system state components"
> which are never saved by a plain XSAVE. So, XSAVES has two
> things that might make its buffer differently-sized from an
> XSAVE-produced one.
>
> The current code assumes that an XSAVES buffer's size is simply
> the sum of the sizes of the (user) states which are supported.
> This seems to work in most cases, but it is not consistent with
> what the SDM says, and it breaks if we 'align' a component in the
> buffer. The calculation is also unnecessary work since the CPU
> *tells* us the size of the buffer directly.
>
> This patch just reads the size of the buffer right out of the
> CPUID leaf instead of trying to derive it.
So how will we know where to find which field, if we cannot even do a size
calculation?
I realize that the calculation and what CPUID gives us should match, but it's not
really good for the kernel to not know the precise layout of a critical task
context data structure ...
So can we turn this into 'double check the CPUID size and print a warning on
mismatch' kind of boot time sanity check? Preferably for all XSAVE* data formats
we can run into. I'd be fine with applying such a patch ahead of enabling
compaction again.
Thanks,
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-08-05 10:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-07-28 17:21 [PATCH] x86, fpu: correct XSAVE xstate size calculation Dave Hansen
2015-08-05 10:32 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2015-08-05 14:34 ` Dave Hansen
2015-08-06 7:15 ` Ingo Molnar
[not found] ` <CA+55aFxzOj-Ee=DN-_3CMeDeYVsmvmmgoxd3hp4MpRSp+og7AQ@mail.gmail.com>
2015-08-06 8:27 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-08-06 8:29 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-08-06 14:56 ` Dave Hansen
2015-08-06 16:03 ` Dave Hansen
2015-08-08 9:15 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-08-06 17:19 ` Dave Hansen
2015-08-08 9:06 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-08-10 21:14 ` Dave Hansen
2015-08-22 13:21 ` Ingo Molnar
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20150805103227.GA3233@gmail.com \
--to=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=dave@sr71.net \
--cc=dvlasenk@redhat.com \
--cc=fenghua.yu@intel.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.