Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 11 Nov 2014 20:46:21 +0100 | From | Borislav Petkov <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 3/6] x86: Add support for the clwb instruction |
| |
On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 12:40:00PM -0700, Ross Zwisler wrote: > Yep, it's weird, I know. :)
But sure, saving opcode space, makes sense to me.
Btw, I'd still be interested about this:
> +static inline void clwb(volatile void *__p) > +{ > + alternative_io_2(".byte " __stringify(NOP_DS_PREFIX) "; clflush %P0",
Any particular reason for using 0x3e as a prefix to have the insns be the same size or is it simply because CLFLUSH can stomach it?
Thanks.
-- Regards/Gruss, Boris.
Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine. --
| |