Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2018 07:56:53 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <>
To: Dan Williams <>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <>,
	linux-arch <>,
	Tom Lendacky <>,
	Andi Kleen <>, Kees Cook <>,
	Kernel Hardening <>,
	Greg KH <>, X86 ML <>,
	Ingo Molnar <>, Al Viro <>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <>,
	Linus Torvalds <>,
	Alan Cox <>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 04/12] x86: introduce __uaccess_begin_nospec and ifence

* Dan Williams <> wrote:

> > The flip side is that if the MFENCE stalls the STAC that is ahead of it could be
> > processed for 'free' - while it's always post barrier with my suggestion.
> This 'for free' aspect is what I aiming for.


> >
> > But in any case it would be nice to see a discussion of this aspect in the
> > changelog, even if the patch does not change.
> I'll add a note to the changelog that having the fence after the
> 'stac' hopefully allows some overlap of the cost of 'stac' and the
> flushing of the instruction pipeline.




Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.