[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <fc6f668458fc4cad8ed009f0a796f5f9@AcuMS.aculab.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2023 09:10:11 +0000
From: David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
To: 'Borislav Petkov' <bp@...en8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>
CC: Sebastian Sumpf <Sebastian.Sumpf@...ode-labs.com>,
"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
"dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com" <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [Bug report] __arch_hweight32/64 x86
From: Borislav Petkov
> Sent: 27 June 2023 05:26
>
> On Mon, Jun 26, 2023 at 03:41:27PM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
> > I'm not even sure that UML needs GENERIC_HWEIGHT. From a quick glance,
> > it looks like x86 used to use GENERIC_HWEIGHT, but got arch-specific
> > versions later. UML just never moved over to the arch-specific versions.
>
> Thanks - that could very well be the explanation.
>
> That bug report made me blink a couple of times since I did take extra
> precaution to not clobber regs in arch/x86/lib/hweight.S as this was
> part of the whole pain back then with calling a function from asm where
> gcc doesn't even know we're calling a function, see:
Perhaps the asm called function should use a different global
label than the one in the C file.
Then it wouldn't be as fragile.
David
-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists