From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: kan.liang@intel.com
Cc: andi@firstfloor.org, alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] x86 perf: Protect LBR msrs accessing against potential #GP
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2014 09:44:30 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140801074430.GB3588@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140801073825.GG19379@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1373 bytes --]
On Fri, Aug 01, 2014 at 09:38:25AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 02:41:02AM -0700, kan.liang@intel.com wrote:
> > From: Kan Liang <kan.liang@intel.com>
> >
> > Intel PT will take over LBR hardware. If RTIT_CTL.TraceEn=1, any attempt to
> > read or write the LBR or LER MSRs, including LBR_TOS, will result in a #GP.
> > Intel PT can be enabled/disabled at runtime by hardware/BIOS, so it's better
> > LBR MSRs can be protected at runtime.
> >
> > The {rd,wr}msrl_goto can protect LBR accessing against the potential #GP.
> > Furthermore, it will not impact the "fast" path's performance.
>
> NAK!
>
> I already said this isn't going to ever happen.
>
> Both PT and LBR are arbitrated through the kernel, therefore we can (and
> must) deny PT when there's existing LBR usage and vice versa.
>
> We will not hijack resources like this full stop end of story.
>
> Fuck hardware/BIOS, they should _NOT_ be touching this.
>
> The 3 people in the world with access to an x86 hardware debugger had
> better be competent and know WTF they're doing and the BIOS can just
> piss off right now, they should not be touching this _EVER_.
I yelled at BIOS engineers over their PMU usage and $vendor added a BIOS
knob to disable that, I'll yell at BIOS engineers again, just give me
their number.
Really, say NO already.
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-08-01 7:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-07-31 9:41 [PATCH 1/3] x86 msr: msr goto extension support kan.liang
2014-07-31 9:41 ` [PATCH 2/3] x86 perf: Protect LBR msrs accessing against potential #GP kan.liang
2014-08-01 7:38 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-08-01 7:44 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2014-08-01 13:21 ` Andi Kleen
2014-08-01 18:50 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-08-02 5:27 ` Ingo Molnar
2014-07-31 9:41 ` [PATCH 3/3] x86 perf: Protect LBR and BTS enabling kan.liang
2014-07-31 21:05 ` [PATCH 1/3] x86 msr: msr goto extension support Andy Lutomirski
2014-08-01 8:05 ` Peter Zijlstra
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=20140801074430.GB3588@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=kan.liang@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®