[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ca79a89a-7240-8572-1688-ec5506c12665@zytor.com>
Date: Tue, 10 May 2016 15:30:48 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, x86-ml <x86@...nel.org>,
Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com>,
Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, zengzhaoxiu@....com,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Zhaoxiu Zeng <zhaoxiu.zeng@...il.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v2] x86/hweight: Get rid of the special calling
convention
On 05/10/16 12:10, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 12:03:48PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> Also, to be fair... if the problem is with these being in C then we
>> could just do it in assembly easily enough.
>
> I thought about converting the __sw_hweight* variants to asm but
> __sw_hweight32, for example, is 55 bytes here and that's a lot.
>
> Or do you have a better idea?
>
> peterz's sounds ok to me: we call a thunk which then calls __sw_hweight*
> after having saved regs properly - problem solved.
>
I didn't mean inline assembly.
-hpa
Powered by blists - more mailing lists