[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJhGHyDpa5oR7+cNv-Tj81uPFNmSKOqN2npCxfbo_zLwasVQrg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2022 20:58:12 +0800
From: Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Lai Jiangshan <jiangshan.ljs@...group.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 0/7] x86/entry: Clean up entry code
On Wed, Mar 16, 2022 at 11:13 PM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 16, 2022 at 04:12:21PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 03:39:42PM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> >
> > > Lai Jiangshan (7):
> > > x86/entry: Use idtentry macro for entry_INT80_compat
> > > x86/traps: Move pt_regs only in fixup_bad_iret()
> > > x86/entry: Switch the stack after error_entry() returns
> > > x86/entry: move PUSH_AND_CLEAR_REGS out of error_entry
> > > x86/entry: Move cld to the start of idtentry
> > > x86/entry: Don't call error_entry for XENPV
> > > x86/entry: Convert SWAPGS to swapgs and remove the definition of
> > > SWAPGS
> >
> > So AFAICT these patches are indeed correct.
> >
> > I do however worry a little bit about the I$ impact of patch 4, and
> > there's a few niggles, but otherwise looks good.
> >
> > I'd love for some of the other x86 people to also look at this, but a
> > tentative ACK on this.
> >
>
> Also, I forgot to mention; they no longer apply cleanly because I
> sprinked ENDBR all over the place. Mostly trivial to fixup though.
They can still be applied to the newest tip/master which already has
sprinked ENDBR. Is there a more proper branch for me to rebase the
patches onto?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists