Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2019 13:56:31 -0700
From: Andy Lutomirski <>
To: Dave Hansen <>
Cc: Marius Hillenbrand <>,,,,, Alexander Graf <>,
 David Woodhouse <>,
 the arch/x86 maintainers <>,
 Andy Lutomirski <>, Peter Zijlstra <>
Subject: Re: [RFC 00/10] Process-local memory allocations for hiding KVM secrets

> On Jun 12, 2019, at 1:41 PM, Dave Hansen <> wrote:
> On 6/12/19 1:27 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>> We've discussed having per-cpu page tables where a given PGD is
>>> only in use from one CPU at a time.  I *think* this scheme still
>>> works in such a case, it just adds one more PGD entry that would
>>> have to context-switched.
>> Fair warning: Linus is on record as absolutely hating this idea. He
>> might change his mind, but it’s an uphill battle.
> Just to be clear, are you referring to the per-cpu PGDs, or to this
> patch set with a per-mm kernel area?

per-CPU PGDs

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.