mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com>
To: "Mathias Krause" <minipli@googlemail.com>
Cc: <herbert@gondor.hengli.com.au>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: your patch "crypto: sha1 - SSSE3 based SHA1 implementation for x86-64" vs xsave
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 13:09:56 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4EC515B40200007800061921@nat28.tlf.novell.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+rthh-1WxhWPeKE-Aqa5NCatxVoKu9=KHhLygkT1A6K35CBDA@mail.gmail.com>

>>> On 17.11.11 at 13:36, Mathias Krause <minipli@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 11:33 AM, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote:
>> Mathias,
>>
>> in avx_usable() you use cpu_has_osxsave to determine whether AVX can
>> actually be used, but I can't see how that conditional would ever evaluate
>> to true.
> 
> Well, it does, at least in my setup, a Core i7-2620M:
> 
>   [   44.902613] sha1_ssse3: Using AVX optimized SHA-1 implementation
> 
>> Checking CPUID.OSXSAVE is actually a user land requirement,
>> whereas in the kernel you should really look at kernel internal variables
>> to determine whether xsave was enabled
> 
> That's a valid point. I actually ported the check from the initial
> assembler implementation which was written with userland code in mind.
> Albeit this test can also be used in kernel code because the kernel
> only sets this flag after xsave was enabled in
> arch/x86/kernel/xsave.c:xstate_enable_boot_cpu/xstate_enable

Indeed, I got this the wrong way round.

>> (or, if you really want to stay
>> with using cpu_has_osxsave you'd have to force re-execution of
>> get_cpu_cap() after xsave got enabled on individual CPUs), namely
>> mmu_cr4_features having X86_CR4_OSXSAVE set.
> 
> I don't see where X86_CR4_OSXSAVE would get reset after xsave init.
> Can you give me a pointer to that code?

I didn't say it would get cleared. I said it should be used in favor of
cpu_has_osxsave.

>> Additionally, under a hypervisor, CPUID.OSXSAVE may be set (due to
>> the hypervisor having enabled xsave), while the kernel may be running
>> with xsave disabled (e.g. due to a command line option saying so).
> 
> When noxsave is given on the kernel command line, X86_FEATURE_XSAVE
> will be cleared and xsave_init() won't call xstate_enable(), so not
> setting X86_CR4_OSXSAVE. All fine.

But you're not looking at this bit, you're looking at cpu_has_osxsave,
which is a CPUID bit (not a CR4 one).

Jan


  reply	other threads:[~2011-11-17 13:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-11-17 10:33 Jan Beulich
2011-11-17 12:36 ` Mathias Krause
2011-11-17 13:09   ` Jan Beulich [this message]
2011-11-17 14:12     ` Mathias Krause

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=4EC515B40200007800061921@nat28.tlf.novell.com \
    --to=jbeulich@suse.com \
    --cc=herbert@gondor.hengli.com.au \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=minipli@googlemail.com \
    /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®