[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4A36ABB5.1040109@goop.org>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 13:14:45 -0700
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
CC: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>,
mingo@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com, paulus@...ba.org, acme@...hat.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl,
penberg@...helsinki.fi, vegard.nossum@...il.com, efault@....de,
npiggin@...e.de, tglx@...utronix.de,
linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [tip:perfcounters/core] perf_counter: x86: Fix call-chain support
to use NMI-safe methods
On 06/15/09 12:04, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> That's an odd way of writing it.
>
> Don't we have a per-cpu segment here? I'd much rather just see it do
> something like this (_before_ restoring the regular registers)
>
> movq EIP(%esp),%rax
> movq ESP(%esp),%rdx
> movq %rax,gs:saved_esp
> movq %rdx,gs:saved_eip
>
> # restore regular regs
> RESTORE_ALL
>
> # skip eip/esp to get at eflags
> addl $16,%esp
> popfq
>
> # restore rsp/rip
> movq gs:saved_esp,%rsp
> jmpq *(gs:saved_eip)
>
> but I haven't thought deeply about it. Maybe there's something wrong with
> the above.
>
We have to restore the usermode %gs somewhere...
J
--
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