Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
From:   David Laight <David.Laight@ACULAB.COM>
To:     'Andi Kleen' <ak@linux.intel.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
CC:     Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        "Ingo Molnar" <mingo@kernel.org>,
        "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        "the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        "Andy Lutomirski" <luto@kernel.org>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
        "Josh Poimboeuf" <jpoimboe@redhat.com>,
        Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>,
        "Peter Zijlstra" <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>, Jiri Kosina <jkosina@suse.cz>,
        Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>,
        Brian Gerst <brgerst@gmail.com>,
        Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@redhat.com>,
        Eduardo Valentin <eduval@amazon.com>,
        Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
        "Liguori, Anthony" <aliguori@amazon.com>,
        Daniel Gruss <daniel.gruss@iaik.tugraz.at>,
        Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@google.com>,
        Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
        "Waim@linux.intel.com" <Waim@linux.intel.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 03/35] x86/entry/32: Load task stack from x86_tss.sp1 in
 SYSENTER handler
Thread-Topic: [PATCH 03/35] x86/entry/32: Load task stack from x86_tss.sp1 in
 SYSENTER handler
Thread-Index: AQHT13bnKx+NN3fDIEG3+xsazjALzqQHym9Q
Date:   Thu, 19 Apr 2018 09:01:12 +0000
Message-ID: <15c09c5a13d244ba8ad3f69ee0a24657@AcuMS.aculab.com>
References: <1523892323-14741-1-git-send-email-joro@8bytes.org>
 <1523892323-14741-4-git-send-email-joro@8bytes.org>
 <87k1t4t7tw.fsf@linux.intel.com>
 <CA+55aFxKzsPQW4S4esvJY=wb7D3LKBdDDcXoMKJSqcOgnD3FuA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20180419003833.GO6694@tassilo.jf.intel.com>
In-Reply-To: <20180419003833.GO6694@tassilo.jf.intel.com>
Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Authenticated_ID: 
X-PolicySMART: 3396946, 3397078
X-Virus-Status: Scanned by VirusSMART (c)
X-Virus-Status: Scanned by VirusSMART (s)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

From: Andi Kleen
> Sent: 19 April 2018 01:39
> 
> On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 05:02:02PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 4:26 PM, Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Seems like a hack. Why can't that be stored in a per cpu variable?
> >
> > It *is* a percpu variable - the whole x86_tss structure is percpu.
> >
> > I guess it could be a different (separate) percpu variable, but might
> > as well use the space we already have allocated.
> 
> Would be better/cleaner to use a separate variable instead of reusing
> x86 structures like this. Who knows what subtle side effects that
> may have eventually.
> 
> It will be also easier to understand in the code.

You could (probably) use an unnamed union in the x86_tss structure
so that it is more obvious that the two variables share a location.

	David