From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 6/7] x86/arch_prctl: Add ARCH_[GET|SET]_CPUID Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2016 09:27:21 +0100 Message-ID: <20161121082721.GA22520@gmail.com> References: <20161117020610.5302-1-khuey@kylehuey.com> <20161117020610.5302-7-khuey@kylehuey.com> <20161118081444.GC15912@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Kyle Huey , Robert O'Callahan , Andy Lutomirski , Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" , x86@kernel.org, Paolo Bonzini , Radim =?utf-8?B?S3LEjW3DocWZ?= , Jeff Dike , Richard Weinberger , Alexander Viro , Shuah Khan , Dave Hansen , Borislav Petkov , Peter Zijlstra , Boris Ostrovsky , Len Brown , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Dmitry Safonov , David Matlack , Nadav To: Thomas Gleixner Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org * Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Fri, 18 Nov 2016, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Kyle Huey wrote: > > > + if (test_tsk_thread_flag(prev_p, TIF_NOCPUID) ^ > > > + test_tsk_thread_flag(next_p, TIF_NOCPUID)) { > > > + set_cpuid_faulting(test_tsk_thread_flag(next_p, TIF_NOCPUID)); > > > + } > > > + > > > > Why not cache the required MSR value in the task struct instead? > > > > That would allow something much more obvious and much faster, like: > > > > if (prev_p->thread.misc_features_val != next_p->thread.misc_features_val) > > wrmsrl(MSR_MISC_FEATURES_ENABLES, next_p->thread.misc_features_val); > > > > (The TIF flag maintenance is still required to get into __switch_to_xtra().) > > > > It would also be easy to extend without extra overhead, should any other feature > > bit be added to the MSR in the future. > > I doubt that. There are feature enable bits coming up which are not related to > tasks. Any inefficiencies resulting from such features should IMHO be carried by those features, not by per task features - but: > [...] So if we have switches enabling/disabling global features, then we would > be forced to chase all threads in order to update all misc_features thread > variables. Surely not what we want to do. What switches would those be? We generally don't twiddle global CPU features post bootup - we pick a model on bootup and go with that. I'd really like to see code (prototype patches are OK - or the person doing it can send it to me privately as well if it's not production quality or public yet), or some careful description of the features involved. Thanks, Ingo