From: "Limonciello, Mario" <Mario.Limonciello@amd.com>
To: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
"Karny, Wyes" <Wyes.Karny@amd.com>
Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Carroll, Lewis" <Lewis.Carroll@amd.com>,
"Shenoy, Gautham Ranjal" <gautham.shenoy@amd.com>,
"Narayan, Ananth" <Ananth.Narayan@amd.com>,
"Rao, Bharata Bhasker" <bharata@amd.com>,
"len.brown@intel.com" <len.brown@intel.com>,
"x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
"tglx@linutronix.de" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"mingo@redhat.com" <mingo@redhat.com>,
"bp@alien8.de" <bp@alien8.de>,
"dave.hansen@linux.intel.com" <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
"hpa@zytor.com" <hpa@zytor.com>,
"chang.seok.bae@intel.com" <chang.seok.bae@intel.com>,
"keescook@chromium.org" <keescook@chromium.org>,
"metze@samba.org" <metze@samba.org>,
"zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com" <zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com>,
"mark.rutland@arm.com" <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] x86: Prefer MWAIT over HALT on AMD processors
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2022 15:34:23 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <BL1PR12MB515745615F4C92627033CD5BE2E49@BL1PR12MB5157.namprd12.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7cdc2103-c6d4-e1b6-9804-6739112eee4d@intel.com>
[Public]
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, April 5, 2022 10:10
> To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>; Karny, Wyes
> <Wyes.Karny@amd.com>
> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; Carroll, Lewis <Lewis.Carroll@amd.com>;
> Limonciello, Mario <Mario.Limonciello@amd.com>; Shenoy, Gautham Ranjal
> <gautham.shenoy@amd.com>; Narayan, Ananth
> <Ananth.Narayan@amd.com>; Rao, Bharata Bhasker <bharata@amd.com>;
> len.brown@intel.com; x86@kernel.org; tglx@linutronix.de;
> mingo@redhat.com; bp@alien8.de; dave.hansen@linux.intel.com;
> hpa@zytor.com; chang.seok.bae@intel.com; keescook@chromium.org;
> metze@samba.org; zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com; mark.rutland@arm.com
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: Prefer MWAIT over HALT on AMD processors
>
> On 4/5/22 07:07, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 05, 2022 at 06:30:21PM +0530, Wyes Karny wrote:
> >> +static inline bool early_mwait_supported(const struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
> >> +{
> >> + if (c->x86_vendor == X86_VENDOR_INTEL)
> >> + return true;
> >> +
> >> + if (c->x86_vendor == X86_VENDOR_AMD && cpu_has(c,
> X86_FEATURE_ZEN))
> > What about Hygon? For some reason you guys don't co-ordinate and we
> end
> > up getting endless 'make-same' patches, sometimes separated by years :/
>
> Believe it or not Hygon seems to work OK with this because:
>
> > static void init_hygon(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
> > {
> ...
> > set_cpu_cap(c, X86_FEATURE_ZEN);
>
> I do worry a bit though that using X86_FEATURE_ZEN is going to bite us
> long-term. It currently claims to be set for "family 0x17 or above":
>
> > #define X86_FEATURE_ZEN ( 7*32+28) /* "" CPU is AMD family
> 0x17 or above (Zen) */
>
> But then it goes and gets used in side-channel defense:
>
> > if (!static_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_ZEN)) {
> > msr |= ssbd_tif_to_amd_ls_cfg(tifn);
> > wrmsrl(MSR_AMD64_LS_CFG, msr);
> > return;
> > }
>
> This seem _bit_ at odds with the commit message (and the AMD SSBD
> whitepaper):
>
> > Add the necessary synchronization logic for AMD family 17H.
>
> So, is X86_FEATURE_ZEN for family==0x17, or family>=0x17?
There are Zen family CPUs and APUs from family 0x19. Perhaps at the
time of the whitepaper there weren't yet though.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-04-05 20:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-04-05 13:00 [PATCH] x86: Prefer MWAIT over HALT on AMD processors Wyes Karny
2022-04-05 14:05 ` Borislav Petkov
2022-04-05 20:26 ` Carroll, Lewis
2022-04-05 20:38 ` Borislav Petkov
2022-04-05 21:49 ` Carroll, Lewis
2022-04-06 9:30 ` Borislav Petkov
2022-04-06 6:14 ` Wyes Karny
2022-04-06 9:25 ` Borislav Petkov
2022-04-05 14:07 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-04-05 15:10 ` Dave Hansen
2022-04-05 15:34 ` Limonciello, Mario [this message]
2022-04-05 15:47 ` Dave Hansen
2022-04-05 20:40 ` Limonciello, Mario
2022-04-06 1:44 ` Thomas Gleixner
2022-04-06 14:23 ` Limonciello, Mario
2022-04-07 21:16 ` Dave Hansen
2022-04-08 1:24 ` Limonciello, Mario
2022-04-14 21:06 ` Limonciello, Mario
2022-04-07 2:19 ` Wen Pu
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=BL1PR12MB515745615F4C92627033CD5BE2E49@BL1PR12MB5157.namprd12.prod.outlook.com \
--to=mario.limonciello@amd.com \
--cc=Ananth.Narayan@amd.com \
--cc=Lewis.Carroll@amd.com \
--cc=Wyes.Karny@amd.com \
--cc=bharata@amd.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=chang.seok.bae@intel.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=gautham.shenoy@amd.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=len.brown@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=metze@samba.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=zhengqi.arch@bytedance.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.