[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87y1gqdvn7.ffs@tglx>
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2023 20:01:48 +0200
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Xin Li <xin3.li@...el.com>,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-edac@...r.kernel.org, linux-hyperv@...r.kernel.org,
kvm@...r.kernel.org, xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org
Cc: mingo@...hat.com, bp@...en8.de, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com,
x86@...nel.org, luto@...nel.org, pbonzini@...hat.com,
seanjc@...gle.com, peterz@...radead.org, jgross@...e.com,
ravi.v.shankar@...el.com, mhiramat@...nel.org,
andrew.cooper3@...rix.com, jiangshanlai@...il.com,
nik.borisov@...e.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 35/37] x86/syscall: Split IDT syscall setup code
into idt_syscall_init()
On Mon, Sep 25 2023 at 09:07, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On September 23, 2023 2:42:10 AM PDT, Xin Li <xin3.li@...el.com> wrote:
>>+/* May not be marked __init: used by software suspend */
>>+void syscall_init(void)
>>+{
>>+ /* The default user and kernel segments */
>>+ wrmsr(MSR_STAR, 0, (__USER32_CS << 16) | __KERNEL_CS);
>>+
>>+ idt_syscall_init();
>>+}
>>+
>> #else /* CONFIG_X86_64 */
>>
>> #ifdef CONFIG_STACKPROTECTOR
>
> Am I missing something, or is this patch a noop?
Yes. It's a noop at this point. Later on it gains a
if (!fred)
idt_syscall_init();
Sure we could do
if (!fred) {
write_msr(foo...);
...
}
too, but I prefer the separation. No strong opinion though.
Thanks,
tglx
Powered by blists - more mailing lists