Skip to content
  • Dave Hansen's avatar
    x86: Introduce disabled-features · 381aa07a
    Dave Hansen authored
    
    
    I believe the REQUIRED_MASK aproach was taken so that it was
    easier to consult in assembly (arch/x86/kernel/verify_cpu.S).
    DISABLED_MASK does not have the same restriction, but I
    implemented it the same way for consistency.
    
    We have a REQUIRED_MASK... which does two things:
    1. Keeps a list of cpuid bits to check in very early boot and
       refuse to boot if those are not present.
    2. Consulted during cpu_has() checks, which allows us to
       optimize out things at compile-time.  In other words, if we
       *KNOW* we will not boot with the feature off, then we can
       safely assume that it will be present forever.
    
    But, we don't have a similar mechanism for CPU features which
    may be present but that we know we will not use.  We simply
    use our existing mechanisms to repeatedly check the status of
    the bit at runtime (well, the alternatives patching helps here
    but it does not provide compile-time optimization).
    
    Adding a feature to disabled-features.h allows the bit to be
    checked via a new macro: cpu_feature_enabled().  Note that
    for features in DISABLED_MASK, checks with this macro have
    all of the benefits of an #ifdef.  Before, we would have done
    this in a header:
    
    #ifdef CONFIG_X86_INTEL_MPX
    #define cpu_has_mpx cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_MPX)
    #else
    #define cpu_has_mpx 0
    #endif
    
    and this in the code:
    
    	if (cpu_has_mpx)
    		do_some_mpx_thing();
    
    Now, just add your feature to DISABLED_MASK and you can do this
    everywhere, and get the same benefits you would have from
    #ifdefs:
    
    	if (cpu_feature_enabled(X86_FEATURE_MPX))
    		do_some_mpx_thing();
    
    We need a new function and *not* a modification to cpu_has()
    because there are cases where we actually need to check the CPU
    itself, despite what features the kernel supports.  The best
    example of this is a hypervisor which has no control over what
    features its guests are using and where the guest does not depend
    on the host for support.
    
    Signed-off-by: default avatarDave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
    Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20140911211513.9E35E931@viggo.jf.intel.com
    
    
    Acked-by: default avatarBorislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>
    Signed-off-by: default avatarH. Peter Anvin <hpa@linux.intel.com>
    381aa07a