Re: crash in entry.S restore_all, 2.6.12-rc2, x86, PAGEALLOC

[Ingo Molnar]

* Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

> > >   	pushfl

> After all, I very strongly suspect that we don't actually really 
> _care_ if eflags stays the same over a system call, and I could see 
> that some dynamic CPU's might prefer not having to push an eflags 
> value that just got changed by the "sti", so it _might_ save several 
> cycles to avoid that dependency, and also obviously avoid a subtle 
> dependency on a sw level that the previous patch clearly introduced.
> 
> Anybody willing to time it? ;)

i can tell you without any measurement that pushfl is slower by a couple 
of cycles than a simple pushl $0x00010046, on basically all x86 CPUs.  
And since we only support SYENTER from 32-bit mode and we dont guarantee 
flags to be saved, it isnt all that incorrect to do?

	Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/