[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <835459920.20630.1589420674977.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com>
Date: Wed, 13 May 2020 21:44:34 -0400 (EDT)
From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, x86 <x86@...nel.org>,
paulmck <paulmck@...nel.org>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Alexandre Chartre <alexandre.chartre@...cle.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>, rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
"Joel Fernandes, Google" <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>,
Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch V4 part 3 09/29] x86/entry/32: Provide macro to emit IDT
entry stubs
----- On May 5, 2020, at 9:44 AM, Thomas Gleixner tglx@...utronix.de wrote:
[...]
> +.macro idtentry vector asmsym cfunc has_error_code:req sane=0
> +SYM_CODE_START(\asmsym)
> + ASM_CLAC
> + cld
Looking at the various interrupt and trap entry points for 32 and 64-bit
x86, I notice a lack of consistency in use of the following instruction
sequence at the asm entry point:
- ASM_CLAC,
- cld (clear direction flag).
Are they always needed, or only for interrupt handlers ?
Thanks,
Mathieu
--
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com
Powered by blists - more mailing lists