[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <8831da5e-b65d-a4e8-2a3b-ac46282f4591@citrix.com>
Date: Thu, 28 May 2020 22:36:54 +0100
From: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: tglx@...utronix.de, luto@...capital.net,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...ux.alibaba.com>,
sean.j.christopherson@...el.com, daniel.thompson@...aro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] x86/entry: Introduce local_db_{save,restore}()
On 28/05/2020 22:15, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 09:52:30PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> On 28/05/2020 21:19, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/debugreg.h
>>> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/debugreg.h
>>> @@ -113,6 +113,31 @@ static inline void debug_stack_usage_inc
>>> static inline void debug_stack_usage_dec(void) { }
>>> #endif /* X86_64 */
>>>
>>> +static __always_inline void local_db_save(unsigned long *dr7)
>>> +{
>>> + get_debugreg(*dr7, 7);
>>> + if (*dr7)
>>> + set_debugreg(0, 7);
>> %dr7 has an architecturally stuck bit in it.
>>
>> You want *dr7 != 0x400 to avoid writing 0 unconditionally.
> Do we have to have that bit set when writing it? Otherwise I might
> actually prefer masking it out.
Not currently. I guess it depends on how likely %dr7 is to gain an
inverted polarity bit like %dr6 did.
~Andrew
Powered by blists - more mailing lists