Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Linux Kernel Markers | From | Andi Kleen <> | Date | 20 Sep 2006 13:50:53 +0200 |
| |
Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> writes:
> Ar Mer, 2006-09-20 am 09:18 +0100, ysgrifennodd Richard J Moore: > > > Are you referring to Intel erratum "unsynchronized cross-modifying code" > > > - where it refers to the practice of modifying code on one processor > > > where another has prefetched the unmodified version of the code. > > > In the special case of replacing an opcode with int3 that erratum doesn't > > apply. I know that's not in the manuals but it has been confirmed by the > > Intel microarchitecture group. And it's not reasonable to it to be any > > other way. > > Ok thats cool to know and I wish they'd documented it. Is the same true > for AMD ?
It pretty much has to, otherwise lots of debuggers would be unhappy
-Andi - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |