Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Mon, 8 Aug 2022 14:01:24 +0200
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
To:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc:     Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@intel.com>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
        Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>, x86@kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@fb.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 5/5] x86/entry: Store CPU info on exception entry
Message-ID: <YvD7FNovYh7UzrAc@zn.tnic>
References: <20220805173009.3128098-1-ira.weiny@intel.com>
 <20220805173009.3128098-6-ira.weiny@intel.com>
 <5d62c1d0-7425-d5bb-ecb5-1dc3b4d7d245@intel.com>
 <Yu4t0jkpIY4grgxL@gmail.com>
 <Yu4wON0MRGH7h5Jv@zn.tnic>
 <Yu+Nwbn4CZUmyD14@gmail.com>
 <Yu+VV8xFTYRh0D0a@zn.tnic>
 <YvAaXet3sBg3mRDe@iweiny-desk3>
 <YvDtfKRyMGenRMU5@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <YvDtfKRyMGenRMU5@gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Aug 08, 2022 at 01:03:24PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> I'd like to hear what Andy Lutomirski thinks about the notion that
> "2 instructions don't matter at all" ...
> 
> Especially since it's now 4 instructions:

He wasn't opposed to it when we talked on IRC last week.

> ... 4 instructions in the exception path is a non-trivial impact.

How do I measure this "impact"?

Hell, we recently added retbleed - and IBRS especially on Intel - on
the entry path which is whopping 30% perf impact in some cases. And
now we're arguing about a handful of insns. I'm sceptical they'll be
anything else but "in-the-noise" in any sensible workload.

Thx.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette