From: David Laight <david.laight.linux@gmail.com>
To: x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: David Laight <david.laight.linux@gmail.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>,
Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com
Subject: [PATCH v2 1/1] x86: In x86-64 barrier_nospec can always be lfence
Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2025 22:02:22 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250209220222.212835-1-david.laight.linux@gmail.com> (raw)
When barrier_nospec() was added the defintion was copied from the
one used to synchronise rdtsc.
On very old cpu rdtsc was a synchronising instruction.
When this change X86_FEATURE_LFENCE_RDTSC (and a MFENCE copy) were
(probably) added so lfence/mfence could be added to synchronise rdtsc.
For old cpu (I think the code checks XMM2) no barrier was added.
I'm not sure why that code was used for barrier_nospec().
Or why rdtsc ended up being synchronised by barrier_nospec().
lfence is the right instruction (well as good as you get).
In any case all x86-64 cpu support XMM2 and lfence so there is
to point using alternative().
Separate the 32bit and 64bit definitions but leave the barrier
missing on old 32bit cpu.
Signed-off-by: David Laight <david.laight.linux@gmail.com>
v2: use a explicit lfence rather than __rmb().
Update commit message text w.r.t rdtsc.
Signed-off-by: David Laight <david.laight.linux@gmail.com>
---
arch/x86/include/asm/barrier.h | 6 +++++-
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/barrier.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/barrier.h
index 7b44b3c4cce1..b9af75624cf5 100644
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/barrier.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/barrier.h
@@ -45,7 +45,11 @@
__mask; })
/* Prevent speculative execution past this barrier. */
-#define barrier_nospec() alternative("", "lfence", X86_FEATURE_LFENCE_RDTSC)
+#ifdef CONFIG_X86_32
+#define barrier_nospec() alternative("", "lfence", X86_FEATURE_XMM2)
+#else
+#define barrier_nospec() asm volatile("lfence":::"memory")
+#endif
#define __dma_rmb() barrier()
#define __dma_wmb() barrier()
--
2.39.5
reply other threads:[~2025-02-09 22:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
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=20250209220222.212835-1-david.laight.linux@gmail.com \
--to=david.laight.linux@gmail.com \
--cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jpoimboe@redhat.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).