linux-kernel - Re: [discuss] [PATCH 1/3] x86_64: additions to the i386 alternative extensions to support x86

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20070220201042.GD5440@amd.com>
Date:	Tue, 20 Feb 2007 21:10:42 +0100
From:	"Joerg Roedel" <joerg.roedel@....com>
To:	"Andi Kleen" <ak@...e.de>
cc:	discuss@...-64.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [discuss] [PATCH 1/3] x86_64: additions to the i386
 alternative extensions to support x86_64 architecture

On Mon, Feb 19, 2007 at 10:29:22PM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Monday 19 February 2007 20:07, Joerg Roedel wrote:
> > From: Joerg Roedel <joerg.roedel@....com>
> > 
> > This patch adds the necessary changes to extend the i386 alternative
> > instruction framework extension on the x86_64 architecture.
> 
> Looks complicated and somewhat fragile.

The tests on i386 and x86_64 just work fine :-)

> I think I would prefer it if you changed the pad field to a "bit not set"
> cpuid field. Then at least 2 alternatives + a nothing alternative could
> be described too.

I'm not sure I fully understand what you mean. Do you mean to add a
further alternative instruction to the struct for supporting 2 alternative
instructions?

Joerg

-- 
Joerg Roedel
Operating System Research Center
AMD Saxony LLC & Co. KG


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/