From 7a5d67048745e3eab62779c6d043a2e3d95dc848 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Andy Lutomirski Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2016 17:31:46 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] x86/cpu: Probe the behavior of nulling out a segment at boot time AMD and Intel do different things when writing zero to a segment selector. Since neither vendor documents the behavior well and it's easy to test the behavior, try nulling fs to see what happens. Signed-off-by: Andy Lutomirski Reviewed-by: Borislav Petkov Cc: Andy Lutomirski Cc: Borislav Petkov Cc: Brian Gerst Cc: Denys Vlasenko Cc: H. Peter Anvin Cc: Linus Torvalds Cc: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Rudolf Marek Cc: Thomas Gleixner Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/61588ba0e0df35beafd363dc8b68a4c5878ef095.1460075211.git.luto@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar --- arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h | 1 + arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c | 31 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 32 insertions(+) diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h index 8f9afefd2dc5..2a052302bc43 100644 --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h @@ -294,6 +294,7 @@ #define X86_BUG_FXSAVE_LEAK X86_BUG(6) /* FXSAVE leaks FOP/FIP/FOP */ #define X86_BUG_CLFLUSH_MONITOR X86_BUG(7) /* AAI65, CLFLUSH required before MONITOR */ #define X86_BUG_SYSRET_SS_ATTRS X86_BUG(8) /* SYSRET doesn't fix up SS attrs */ +#define X86_BUG_NULL_SEG X86_BUG(9) /* Nulling a selector preserves the base */ #ifdef CONFIG_X86_32 /* diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c index 7fea4079d102..8e40eee5843a 100644 --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c @@ -889,6 +889,35 @@ static void detect_nopl(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c) #endif } +static void detect_null_seg_behavior(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c) +{ +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_64 + /* + * Empirically, writing zero to a segment selector on AMD does + * not clear the base, whereas writing zero to a segment + * selector on Intel does clear the base. Intel's behavior + * allows slightly faster context switches in the common case + * where GS is unused by the prev and next threads. + * + * Since neither vendor documents this anywhere that I can see, + * detect it directly instead of hardcoding the choice by + * vendor. + * + * I've designated AMD's behavior as the "bug" because it's + * counterintuitive and less friendly. + */ + + unsigned long old_base, tmp; + rdmsrl(MSR_FS_BASE, old_base); + wrmsrl(MSR_FS_BASE, 1); + loadsegment(fs, 0); + rdmsrl(MSR_FS_BASE, tmp); + if (tmp != 0) + set_cpu_bug(c, X86_BUG_NULL_SEG); + wrmsrl(MSR_FS_BASE, old_base); +#endif +} + static void generic_identify(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c) { c->extended_cpuid_level = 0; @@ -921,6 +950,8 @@ static void generic_identify(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c) get_model_name(c); /* Default name */ detect_nopl(c); + + detect_null_seg_behavior(c); } static void x86_init_cache_qos(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c) -- 2.20.1