[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aFsPRSrr79t8FHtr@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2025 23:49:09 +0300
From: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>
To: Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@...il.com>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>, linux-sgx@...r.kernel.org,
x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/sgx: Use ENCLS mnemonic in <kernel/cpu/sgx/encls.h>
On Tue, Jun 17, 2025 at 06:20:49PM +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 17, 2025 at 5:01 PM Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 6/17/25 07:44, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > > I don't really see how this is that useful. That said, f a bug fix or
> > > feature used encls mnemonic, I'd had no problems with acking it.
> >
> > It's not _that_ useful.
> >
> > But old assemblers that we still want to use *NEVER* have support for
> > newfanlged instructions, so we always add new instructions with ".byte".
> > Then, a few years down the road when we've moved to just old assemblers
> > instead of super old assemblers, we move to the real instruction names.
>
> That, and the code becomes self-documenting. You don't have to scratch
> your head what the .byte stream represents when reading assembly.
I hear you but I doubt that here looking into the code in detail and
not being aware of ENCLS opcode would be unlikely :-)
That said, I'm cool with applying the patch to tip.
>
> Uros.
BR, Jarkko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists