[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <86802c440809292334o557d2158ob2c52aebd3caf0b3@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2008 23:34:51 -0700
From: "Yinghai Lu" <yinghai@...nel.org>
To: "Jeremy Fitzhardinge" <jeremy@...p.org>
Cc: "Krzysztof Helt" <krzysztof.h1@...zta.fm>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, "Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...e.hu>,
"Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: do not allow to optimize flag_is_changeable_p()
On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 11:14 PM, Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org> wrote:
> Krzysztof Helt wrote:
>> From: Krzysztof Helt <krzysztof.h1@...pl>
>>
>> The flag_is_changeable_p() is used by
>> has_cpuid_p() which can return different results
>> in the code sequence below:
>>
>> if (!have_cpuid_p())
>> identify_cpu_without_cpuid(c);
>>
>> /* cyrix could have cpuid enabled via c_identify()*/
>> if (!have_cpuid_p())
>> return;
>>
>> Otherwise, the gcc 3.4.6 optimizes these two calls
>> into one which make the code not working correctly.
>> Cyrix cpus have the CPUID instruction enabled but
>> it is not detected due to the gcc optimization.
>> Thus the ARR registers (mtrr like) are not detected
>> on such a cpu.
>>
>
> If "asm volatile" changes the code and fixes the bug, it seems like
> you're making use of an undocumented - or at least non-portable - behaviour.
>
> Does adding a "memory" clobber also fix the problem? That would have
> better defined characteristics.
>
how about
if (!have_cpuid_p()) {
identify_cpu_without_cpuid(c);
/* cyrix could have cpuid enabled via c_identify()*/
if (!have_cpuid_p())
return;
}
YH
--
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