[lkml]   [2014]   [May]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 7/9] x86: skip check for spurious faults for non-present faults
On 05/15/2014 12:22 PM, Keir Fraser wrote:
>> Are we chasing hardware errata here? Or did someone go off and *assume*
>> that the x86 hardware architecture work a certain way? Or is there
>> something way more subtle going on?
> See Intel Developer's Manual Vol 3 Section, 3rd bullet... This
> is expected behaviour, probably to make copy-on-write faults faster.

Hm, yes. My memory of this comes from before these formal rules were
written down... I guess there is some wiggle room in there, presumably
as you say, for performance reasons (or implementation leeway, which is
another way to say performance.)

This does make a P bit switch architecturally different from W or NX, so
I'm okay with that, but I would like the patch adjusted in the following

1. Put in an explicit comment about the architectural difference
between the P bit on one hand and an W and NX on the other; an SDM
reference is good, and *why* this makes the specific filtering

2. Please use the standard format for multiline comments;

* blah
* blah

With that this should be okay.


 \ /
  Last update: 2014-05-15 22:21    [W:0.088 / U:17.884 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site