[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080908171858.GQ26079@one.firstfloor.org>
Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2008 19:18:58 +0200
From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
linux@...dersweb.net, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
Andi Kleen <andi-suse@...stfloor.org>
Subject: Re: [BUG] x86 kenel won't boot under Virtual PC
> Btw, I do think that the whole NOPL issue is separate from all the other
> issues. There can be _other_ cases where it really is worth doing some
> "generic" optimizations or being more "specific", and my argument really
> is that NOPL is _not_ one of those cases.
>
> So I'm still not sure that X86_GENERIC is necessarily the answer. The
FWIW I personally think Linux should always use very conservative nops.
Unconditionally. This issue already cost far too much developer time
and it's unlikely to be worth it.
> Peter - does gcc actually use NOPL in _32-bit_ code too? It really seems
gcc just uses .p2align, so it comes down to binutils
Yes there seems to be a pretty scary ISA selection code in there.
Line 565 of
http://www.google.com/codesearch?hl=en&q=i386_align_code+show:pxieOi43ptA:OXGjJbna8V8:zfd_fdPYgEI&sa=N&cd=1&ct=rc&cs_p=http://gentoo.osuosl.org/distfiles/binutils-2.17.50.0.13.tar.bz2&cs_f=binutils-2.17.50.0.13/gas/config/tc-i386.c
I haven't decoded it completely, but I suspect it does the wrong thing.
-Andi
--
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