Messages in this thread | | | From | Andy Lutomirski <> | Date | Tue, 5 Jun 2018 03:22:22 -0700 | Subject | Re: [PATCH 6/6] x86/vdso: Move out the CPU number store |
| |
On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 10:36 PM H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> wrote: > > On 06/04/18 20:57, Mika Penttilä wrote: > > > > This won't work on X86-32 because it actually uses the segment limit with fs: access. So there > > is a reason why the lsl based method is X86-64 only. > > > > <thinks out loud> > > Why does that matter in any shape, way, or form? The LSL instruction > doesn't touch any of the segment registers, it just uses a segment > selector number. > > <looks at code> > > I see... we have a VERY unfortunate name collision: the x86-64 > GDT_ENTRY_PERC_PU and the i386 GDT_ENTRY_PERCPU are in fact two > completely different things, with the latter being the actual percpu > offset used by the kernel. > > So yes, this patch is wrong, because the naming of the x86-64 segment is > insane especially in the proximity of the -- it should be something > like GDT_ENTRY_CPU_NUMBER. > > Unfortunately we probably can't use the same GDT entry on x86-32 and > x86-64, because entry 15 (selector 0x7b) is USER_DS, which is something > we really don't want to screw with. This means i386 programs that > execute LSL directly for whatever reason will have to understand the > difference, but most of the other segment numbers differ as well, > including user space %cs (USER_CS/USER32_CS) and %ds/%es/%ss (USER_DS). > Perhaps we could bump down segments 23-28 by one and put it as 23, that > way the CPU_NUMBER segment would always be at %ss+80 for the default > (flat, initial) user space %ss. (We want to specify using %ss rather > than %ds, because it is less likely to be changed and because 64 bits, > too, have %ss defined, but not %ds.) > > <action item> > > Rename the x86-64 segment to CPU_NUMBER, fixing the naming conflict.
Yes, agreed. Probably as its own patch *before* the rest of this cleanup.
> Add 1 to GDT entry numbers 23-28 for i386 (all of these are > kernel-internal segments and so have no impact on user space). > Add i386 CPU_NUMBER equivalent to x86-64 at GDT entry 23. > Document the above relationship between segments.
Sure, but also as a standalone patch, please.
> > OK, everyone? > > -hpa
| |