On Sat, Jun 10, 2000 at 04:05:29PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> > diff -ur linux/arch/i386/kernel/microcode.c linux-prumpf/arch/i386/kernel/microcode.c
> > --- linux/arch/i386/kernel/microcode.c Fri Jun 9 19:05:09 2000
> > +++ linux-prumpf/arch/i386/kernel/microcode.c Fri Jun 9 19:06:19 2000
> > @@ -227,7 +227,7 @@
> > }
> >
> > wrmsr(0x79, (unsigned int)(m->bits), 0);
> > - __asm__ __volatile__ ("cpuid");
> > + __asm__ __volatile__ ("cpuid" : : : "ax", "bx", "cx", "dx", "cc");
> > rdmsr(0x8B, val[0], val[1]);
> >
> > req->err = 0;
> >
>
> The "cc" isn't required.
Who knows what the microcode update changed ? OTOH, if that is the case,
it'd be cleaner to use one asm statement anyway.
I agree this would make sense though:
diff -ur linux/include/asm-i386/processor.h linux-prumpf/include/asm-i386/processor.h
--- linux/include/asm-i386/processor.h Sun Jun 11 04:10:56 2000
+++ linux-prumpf/include/asm-i386/processor.h Sun Jun 11 04:12:46 2000
@@ -147,8 +147,7 @@
"=b" (*ebx),
"=c" (*ecx),
"=d" (*edx)
- : "a" (op)
- : "cc");
+ : "a" (op));
}
unless there's some weird non-Intel CPU out there that breaks it.
Philipp Rumpf
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jun 15 2000 - 21:00:22 EST