mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86, cpu: Fix X86_FEATURE_NOPL
Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2010 23:48:38 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20101004214838.GA26084@liondog.tnic> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4CAA455D.8000902@zytor.com>

From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Date: Mon, Oct 04, 2010 at 02:21:33PM -0700

> On 10/04/2010 02:12 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 2:02 PM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Actually, cpu_has() depends on:
> >> #if defined(CONFIG_X86_P6_NOP) || defined(CONFIG_X86_64)
> > 
> > Ahh. Right you are. The place that depends on just P6_NOP is the
> > default NOP choice logic in <asm/nops.h>
> > 
> > But the end result ends up being the same: can we please clean this
> > all up so that it isn't so confusing? Rather than add to the
> > confusion?
> > 
> 
> Agreed that this should be cleaned up.  However, in the meantime I'd
> like to keep Borislav's patch in the tree since it makes the code
> technically correct at least.

I think the cleanup should be easy: on 64-bit unconditionally return
p6_nops in find_nop_table() since every 64-bit processor should support
them and on 32-bit never return p6_nops since X86_FEATURE_NOPL is not
set there and fall back to intel_nops on non-AMD. Which means we can get
rid of X86_FEATURE_NOPL altogether. Too radical?

Hmmm...

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

  reply	other threads:[~2010-10-04 21:48 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-10-03  9:37 NOPL on 32-bit Borislav Petkov
2010-10-03 14:43 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-10-03 15:22   ` [PATCH] x86, cpu: X86_FEATURE_NOPL should be disabled on 32-bit only Borislav Petkov
2010-10-03 18:19     ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-10-03 20:11       ` Borislav Petkov
2010-10-03 22:22         ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-10-04  7:31           ` [PATCH] x86, cpu: Fix X86_FEATURE_NOPL Borislav Petkov
2010-10-04 20:36             ` [tip:x86/cpu] " tip-bot for Borislav Petkov
2010-10-05  9:47               ` Borislav Petkov
2010-10-05 16:30                 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-10-05 16:53                   ` Borislav Petkov
2010-10-04 20:47             ` [PATCH] " Linus Torvalds
2010-10-04 21:02               ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-10-04 21:12                 ` Linus Torvalds
2010-10-04 21:21                   ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-10-04 21:48                     ` Borislav Petkov [this message]
2010-10-04 21:50                       ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-10-04 21:53                       ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-10-05  6:19                         ` Borislav Petkov
2010-10-04 22:17                     ` Hugh Dickins
2010-10-04 22:19                       ` H. Peter Anvin

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20101004214838.GA26084@liondog.tnic \
    --to=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®