On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 10:24 AM Nadav Amit wrote:
>
> > On Aug 27, 2019, at 5:30 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 4:52 PM Nadav Amit wrote:
> >>> On Aug 27, 2019, at 4:18 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 11:07 PM Nadav Amit wrote:
>
> On Aug 27, 2019, at 5:30 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 4:52 PM Nadav Amit wrote:
>>> On Aug 27, 2019, at 4:18 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 11:07 PM Nadav Amit wrote:
INVPCID is considerably slower than INVLPG of a single PTE, but i
On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 4:52 PM Nadav Amit wrote:
>
> > On Aug 27, 2019, at 4:18 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 11:07 PM Nadav Amit wrote:
> >> INVPCID is considerably slower than INVLPG of a single PTE, but it is
> >> currently used to flush PTEs in the user page-tab
> On Aug 27, 2019, at 4:18 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>
> On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 11:07 PM Nadav Amit wrote:
>> INVPCID is considerably slower than INVLPG of a single PTE, but it is
>> currently used to flush PTEs in the user page-table when PTI is used.
>>
>> Instead, it is possible to defer T
On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 11:07 PM Nadav Amit wrote:
>
> INVPCID is considerably slower than INVLPG of a single PTE, but it is
> currently used to flush PTEs in the user page-table when PTI is used.
>
> Instead, it is possible to defer TLB flushes until after the user
> page-tables are loaded. Preve
Sorry, I made a mistake and included the wrong patches. I will send
RFC v2 in few minutes.
> On Aug 23, 2019, at 3:46 PM, Nadav Amit wrote:
>
> INVPCID is considerably slower than INVLPG of a single PTE, but it is
> currently used to flush PTEs in the user page-table when PTI is used.
>
> Inst
6 matches
Mail list logo