Re: Hyper-Threading Vulnerability
From: Alan Cox (alan_at_lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk)
Date: 05/14/05
- Previous message: Ingo Molnar: "Re: Does smp_reschedule_interrupt really reschedule?"
- In reply to: Lee Revell: "Re: Hyper-Threading Vulnerability"
- Next in thread: andrea_at_cpushare.com: "Re: Hyper-Threading Vulnerability"
- Reply: andrea_at_cpushare.com: "Re: Hyper-Threading Vulnerability"
- Reply: Lee Revell: "Re: Hyper-Threading Vulnerability"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
To: Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com> Date: Sat, 14 May 2005 16:23:10 +0100
On Sad, 2005-05-14 at 00:38, Lee Revell wrote:
> Well yes but you would still have to recompile those apps. And take the
> big performance hit from using gettimeofday vs rdtsc. Disabling HT by
> default looks pretty good by comparison.
You cannot use rdtsc for anything but rough instruction timing. The
timers for different processors run at different speeds on some SMP
systems, the timer rates vary as processors change clock rate nowdays.
Rdtsc may also jump dramatically on a suspend/resume.
If the app uses rdtsc then generally speaking its terminally broken. The
only exception is some profiling tools.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Previous message: Ingo Molnar: "Re: Does smp_reschedule_interrupt really reschedule?"
- In reply to: Lee Revell: "Re: Hyper-Threading Vulnerability"
- Next in thread: andrea_at_cpushare.com: "Re: Hyper-Threading Vulnerability"
- Reply: andrea_at_cpushare.com: "Re: Hyper-Threading Vulnerability"
- Reply: Lee Revell: "Re: Hyper-Threading Vulnerability"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
|
