[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200803060938.20944.langer_mann@web.de>
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 09:38:19 +0100
From: Stephan Diestelhorst <langer_mann@....de>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: davej@...emonkey.org.uk, cpufreq@...ts.linux.org.uk,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] Speedfreq-SMI call clobbers ECX
On, March 5th 2008 16:35:20 Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Stephan Diestelhorst <langer_mann@....de> wrote:
> > @@ -184,7 +184,7 @@ static void speedstep_set_state (unsigne
> > __asm__ __volatile__(
> > "movl $0, %%edi\n"
> > "out %%al, (%%dx)\n"
> > - : "=b" (new_state), "=D" (result)
> > + : "=b" (new_state), "=D" (result), "=c" (ecx_clobber)
> >
> > : "a" (command), "b" (function), "c" (state), "d" (smi_port),
> > : "S" (0)
> >
> > );
>
> stupid suggestion: why not do a pusha/popa around those
> instructions, to make sure everything is restored? This isnt a
> fastpath and being conservative about SMI side-effects cannot hurt
That sounds like a sane thing to do to me. Should I provide a 'patch'?
Or leave that (and the decision about it) to the maintainer?
Regards,
Stephan
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists