From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752737AbdLLSgt (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Dec 2017 13:36:49 -0500 Received: from mail-it0-f48.google.com ([209.85.214.48]:37516 "EHLO mail-it0-f48.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752512AbdLLSgo (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Dec 2017 13:36:44 -0500 X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACJfBos/434Yu04K/e8QilSvGUSGFONsXj8Ihw2Pwry9BM441XzyUkziHjx6r68s+XigMZXy+kVdHwFnFC+N7kiaabI= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <2809506.pL8kVbvXcY@aspire.rjw.lan> <1578405.51lzoSX1jh@aspire.rjw.lan> <20171209103325.GA13867@amd> <20171209220110.GA11496@amd> <20171210162305.GA10159@amd> <20171210185638.GA10363@amd> <20171210204350.GA25013@amd> From: Linus Torvalds Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2017 10:36:43 -0800 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 5fIOTXrpB1IiwHkuMZxW73wC7EY Message-ID: Subject: Re: Linux 4.15-rc2: Regression in resume from ACPI S3 To: Andy Lutomirski Cc: Pavel Machek , Zhang Rui , Thomas Gleixner , Jarkko Nikula , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , "the arch/x86 maintainers" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 10:05 AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote: >> >> - do NOT use "load_gs_index()", which does that swapgs dance (twice!) >> and plays with interrupt state. Just load the segment register, and >> then do the wrmsrl() of the {FS,GS,KERNEL_GS}_BASE values. There is no >> need for the swapgs dance. > > Using what helper? On x86_64, it can fault, and IIRC we explicitly > don't allow loadsegment(gs, ...). Just do the loadsegment() thing. The fact that we don't have a gs version of it is legacy - to catch bad users. It shouldn't stop us from having good users. That said - can it really fault? Because if it can, then why can't %fs fault? And on x86-64, we just do asm volatile ("movw %0, %%fs" :: "r" (ctxt->fs)); and don't actually use 'loadsegment()' for _any_ of the segments. We only do the fault protection on 32-bit. In fact, we really should try to avoid taking faults here anyway, shouldn't we? We haven't loaded enough of the context yet. Hmm. Maybe we should load only the fixed kernel segments at this point, and then do all the loadsegment() of gs/fs in the later phase when we're all set up. THERE we can do the swapgs dance with interrupt tracing etc, because *there* we actually are fully set up. I guess that means reloading the FS/GS base MSR's, Linus