From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S934985AbbCDHNb (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Wed, 4 Mar 2015 02:13:31 -0500
Received: from mail-wi0-f172.google.com ([209.85.212.172]:38179 "EHLO
	mail-wi0-f172.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S933558AbbCDHN3 (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 4 Mar 2015 02:13:29 -0500
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2015 08:13:24 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Cc: X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 07/15] x86/lib/copy_user_64.S: Convert to ALTERNATIVE_2
Message-ID: <20150304071324.GA22028@gmail.com>
References: <1424776497-3180-1-git-send-email-bp@alien8.de>
 <1424776497-3180-8-git-send-email-bp@alien8.de>
 <20150304062552.GA16111@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20150304062552.GA16111@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org


* Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> wrote:

> 
> * Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> wrote:
> 
> > From: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>
> > 
> > Use the asm macro and drop the locally grown version.
> 
> > @@ -73,9 +49,11 @@ ENTRY(_copy_to_user)
> >  	jc bad_to_user
> >  	cmpq TI_addr_limit(%rax),%rcx
> >  	ja bad_to_user
> > +	ALTERNATIVE_2 "jmp copy_user_generic_unrolled",		\
> > +		      "jmp copy_user_generic_string",		\
> > +		      X86_FEATURE_REP_GOOD,			\
> > +		      "jmp copy_user_enhanced_fast_string",	\
> > +		      X86_FEATURE_ERMS
> 
> Btw., as a future optimization, wouldn't it be useful to patch this 
> function at its first instruction, i.e. to have three fully functional 
> copy_user_generic_ variants and choose to jmp to one of them in the 
> first instruction of the original function?
> 
> The advantage would be two-fold:
> 
>  1) right now: smart microarchitectures that are able to optimize
>     jump-after-jump (and jump-after-call) targets in their branch
>     target cache can do so in this case, reducing the overhead of the
>     patching, possibly close to zero in the cached case.

Btw., the x86 memset() variants are using this today, and I think this 
is the most optimal jump-patching variant, even if it means a small 
amount of code duplication between the copy_user variants.

Thanks,

	Ingo