Received: by 2002:ac0:a5a7:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id m36-v6csp214756imm; Fri, 13 Jul 2018 22:09:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpcC8VwoX0sq1dZjoQVvLHeieqyn+EP8YwgESOyBbldISxoLlgaTkLkEx5fRD9rqgnqStCO7 X-Received: by 2002:a62:c699:: with SMTP id x25-v6mr10014689pfk.16.1531544961803; Fri, 13 Jul 2018 22:09:21 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1531544961; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=PJgqctDqad/qMZtwO3ezEft8adn+8mSNOamem+nDTXYjc/QAfLqdhSRu0f/0SKkeRN 2nvnFEYFRVWNdDcZOiGhJLAB8NxuzRo2mxD3zoTXg2xz/KDrNzmZP35Cmjsf2z7sPDDt pkeRI6ymB0/DZyIwBXh6VSGa3CDjZ37yl7odXd+5AKWgW/7xWw4g1BwX32OHMqFXSoB3 T2fheWKwSqGIWg9w6/rciLv61VDT/13qCYzX13G6Thsg8HpIsQ4fzH5T3z5rCfWf+3GF jdu9rQT7eZHiVNBgKBHIXb9LGde80z2h55tba1MM1acdn/qKc6t+5Z6f6wELU4KtIasi tXLQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc :to:from:date:arc-authentication-results; bh=QvbEa8bzscVQrApU1BetUP1Uo/SMIMvaYOaSwfOEw4w=; b=z1a4MISk10bxXwBK3xtG/md4JXfFMbyQQf9wj6RZfC7t+4/Lgbjs1AM7uTuz27Zu2K YEl/V/yz6SmrbJBN0HxZWEiJdXVb9Rx/ASW0A64qhqsiW5daKd1SrUdEL56VeNL9eKZG iXK5KaGiTKOqurUX0ln70Tk7h9w9Ch3m6xhQ7sBnvFGwAi+EjEw57l04LrU+VRLsu2sP czH+bOq+7oSKODhpuSgyzOaCvS8gMC6bwF84tVtnMQEFSy6mDPd5b6oQIAHIkV3nijvJ ESgxyHbyKTL9jEHLrwHMwPXAFPSnzjQBoYOVhWuhag1jGJNmvFlsBT16pL7tW5WBuV8j hwKQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id w9-v6si14543060ply.462.2018.07.13.22.09.05; Fri, 13 Jul 2018 22:09:21 -0700 (PDT) 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; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1725978AbeGNF0N (ORCPT + 99 others); Sat, 14 Jul 2018 01:26:13 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:34830 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725863AbeGNF0N (ORCPT ); Sat, 14 Jul 2018 01:26:13 -0400 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de Received: from relay1.suse.de (unknown [195.135.220.254]) by mx1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id B876CAEDB; Sat, 14 Jul 2018 05:08:29 +0000 (UTC) Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2018 07:08:28 +0200 From: Joerg Roedel To: Andy Lutomirski Cc: Joerg Roedel , Borislav Petkov , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , "H . Peter Anvin" , X86 ML , LKML , Linux-MM , Linus Torvalds , Dave Hansen , Josh Poimboeuf , Juergen Gross , Peter Zijlstra , Jiri Kosina , Boris Ostrovsky , Brian Gerst , David Laight , Denys Vlasenko , Eduardo Valentin , Greg KH , Will Deacon , "Liguori, Anthony" , Daniel Gruss , Hugh Dickins , Kees Cook , Andrea Arcangeli , Waiman Long , Pavel Machek , "David H . Gutteridge" Subject: Re: [PATCH 38/39] x86/mm/pti: Add Warning when booting on a PCID capable CPU Message-ID: <20180714050828.wl44vgwa7kzptsws@suse.de> References: <1531308586-29340-1-git-send-email-joro@8bytes.org> <1531308586-29340-39-git-send-email-joro@8bytes.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170421 (1.8.2) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jul 13, 2018 at 11:59:44AM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 4:29 AM, Joerg Roedel wrote: > > From: Joerg Roedel > > > > Warn the user in case the performance can be significantly > > improved by switching to a 64-bit kernel. > > ... > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_32 > > + if (boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_PCID)) { > > I'm a bit confused. Wouldn't the setup_clear_cpu_cap() call in > early_identify_cpu() prevent this from working? Right you are, I don't have a PCID capable system at hand for testing, so I didn't catch this... > Boris, do we have a straightforward way to ask "does the CPU advertise > this feature in CPUID regardless of whether we have it enabled right > now"? I guess we need to call cpuid again. Regards, Joerg