[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH] x86/spec-ctrl: Fix default calculation of opt_srb_lock
- To: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>
- From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2022 17:19:02 +0100
- Arc-authentication-results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=suse.com; dkim=pass header.d=suse.com; arc=none
- Arc-message-signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-1; bh=4rQhLGp70ru/tHxpdlOmg012WlKRsogkAHdcqm6PA4o=; b=AxZPhcFUStXZDk8R1U1eUE8ivK6Kz7fYdvt5VX+PUAPXHZMMARy4td5z463lalN0GYdJZw9yA+sGEeDfodMpgfYz/iDLvtc/FAShUUxiTOGUmeCJWKA4A3IqQHcxVdRHsrUtPoQ0WjhbxRTQ2KKVlloKf7iGP7xRiRW1h7QcvwUNJ/QyH3E+0LLiMq/rJOaHZWXWIvmrKpho5jSkh5HznEnrwg4dYWW1i8P9C1SziKO+K74fNldi/Yezmh9EnqMc0fbTln2UOFpbYWFjJu1tbULMrK1Ahu7ugCpKUhwtPMSOYBSEOrE4iV8r5/1k1rKg5djHDQjBjEv2gmUFlhMBMg==
- Arc-seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=SCH3dyUrZMDpOFdKqvrF5wSMoZLx1W58mMiyzh5Pn6ALC7y7Gb75RL2bHn0Jb0Ns4s5srGL37r1TQPRp6RG8iIHwTfb0Ur9yRflkqcDbBhIqUM0IQ2cn/kVDHARkVz5Ygxaf0GDZsYVEmAZODOssisg36+bqJ6tHExOC3gJvPs3CBh3UopUPHhq95qxkJPnllGLY7HyqvrwYEjZPT8s+4yuFIyYKiTztDYtA3H/1V+F4KFjA3Dx/N5RNXZ5l1oL2KGANyqS6YLXe20fgAkQ4hngf0xuWiXdffNj99VK0qXQ9ZEKe50IX661a7NTVa9gpy1fRrr1VhXNIvTq++ZTCMw==
- Authentication-results: dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;dmarc=none action=none header.from=suse.com;
- Cc: Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>, Wei Liu <wl@xxxxxxx>, Xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Delivery-date: Wed, 05 Jan 2022 16:19:32 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
On 04.01.2022 15:44, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> Since this logic was introduced, opt_tsx has become more complicated and
> shouldn't be compared to 0 directly. While there are no buggy logic paths,
> the correct expression is !(opt_tsx & 1) but the rtm_disabled boolean is
> easier and clearer to use.
>
> Fixes: 8fe24090d940 ("x86/cpuid: Rework HLE and RTM handling")
Is this accurate? Backporting the change to 4.13 locally, I notice that
commit (and hence the rtm_disabled global variable) is not present on
that branch, yet opt_tsx already has the "more complicated" behavior.
Jan
|
