| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
xen-devel
[Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH RFC V4 09/10] x86/jump_label: use GENERIC_NOP5_AT
|
To: |
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx> |
|
Subject: |
[Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH RFC V4 09/10] x86/jump_label: use GENERIC_NOP5_ATOMIC instead of jmp5 +0 |
|
From: |
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx> |
|
Date: |
Thu, 13 Oct 2011 09:50:00 -0700 |
|
Cc: |
the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@xxxxxxxxxx>, Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@xxxxxxxxxx>, Jan Glauber <jang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Jason Baron <jbaron@xxxxxxxxxx>, David Daney <david.daney@xxxxxxxxxx>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Michael Ellerman <michael@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Xen Devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx>, "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
Delivery-date: |
Thu, 13 Oct 2011 11:17:08 -0700 |
|
Envelope-to: |
www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|
In-reply-to: |
<4E97067A.2070305@xxxxxxxxx> |
|
List-help: |
<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help> |
|
List-id: |
Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com> |
|
List-post: |
<mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com> |
|
List-subscribe: |
<http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe> |
|
List-unsubscribe: |
<http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe> |
|
References: |
<cover.1318464169.git.jeremy.fitzhardinge@xxxxxxxxxx> <34ede5db1571d541a5c3fc49923bb353a37dd431.1318464413.git.jeremy.fitzhardinge@xxxxxxxxxx> <4E97067A.2070305@xxxxxxxxx> |
|
Sender: |
xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:7.0.1) Gecko/20110930 Thunderbird/7.0.1 |
On 10/13/2011 08:40 AM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 10/12/2011 05:08 PM, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
>> From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> GENERIC_NOP5_ATOMIC should make a better nop.
>>
> On 32 bits, yes. On 64 bits you should use P6_NOP5_ATOMIC.
So the cleanest way of fixing that is to make the GENERIC_NOP* be
defined to P6_NOP* on 64-bit then? Assuming I'm correct in guessing
that the intent of GENERIC_NOP* is "a basically good-enough NOP that
will work on any x86".
J
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
|
|
| |
|
Home