[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4F0630CC.7050001@zytor.com>
Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2012 15:22:52 -0800
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
CC: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@...e.com>, mingo@...e.hu, tglx@...utronix.de,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: x86-64: memset()/memcpy() not fully standards compliant
On 01/05/2012 10:28 AM, Andi Kleen wrote:
>>
>> Otherwise, is there any rationale for this sort of lurking bug?
>
> Most (all?) of the CPUs I cared about when writing that code had
> bugs with string instructions and >4GB.
>
Is that still true, and do we even use string instructions still on
those old CPUs? Jan's fixes don't introduce any additional delays in
the non-string-instruction paths.
-hpa
--
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf.
--
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