[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180607184142.GJ12217@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2018 20:41:42 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
Cc: Yu-cheng Yu <yu-cheng.yu@...el.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. J. Lu" <hjl.tools@...il.com>,
"Shanbhogue, Vedvyas" <vedvyas.shanbhogue@...el.com>,
"Ravi V. Shankar" <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
mike.kravetz@...cle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/10] x86/cet: Introduce WRUSS instruction
On Thu, Jun 07, 2018 at 09:40:02AM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> Peterz, isn't there some fancy better way we're supposed to handle the
> error return these days?
Don't think so. I played with a few things but that never really went
anywhere.
Also, both asm things look suspicously similar, it might make sense to
share. Also, maybe do the instruction .byte sequence in a #define INSN
or something.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists