Re: [PATCH 1/2 v3] x86: introduce int3-based instruction patching

[H. Peter Anvin]

On 07/11/2013 01:26 PM, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> 
> synchronization after replacing "all but first" instructions should not
> be necessary (on Intel hardware), as the syncing after the subsequent
> patching of the first byte provides enough safety.
> But there's not only Intel HW out there, and we'd rather be on a safe
> side.
> 

Has anyone talked to AMD or VIA about this at all?  Did anyone else ever
make SMP-capable x86?

	-hpa

--
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/