2014-04-02 07:16, Neil Horman: > On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 01:51:04PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > > On 03/25/2014 12:52 PM, Neil Horman wrote: > > > Neil Horman reported that on x86-64 the upper half of %rbx would get > > > clobbered when the code was compiled PIC or PIE, because the > > > i386-specific code to preserve %ebx was incorrectly compiled. > > > > > > However, the code is really way more complex than it needs to be. For > > > one thing, the CPUID instruction only needs %eax (leaf) and %ecx > > > (subleaf) as parameters, and since we are testing for bits, we might > > > as well list the bits explicitly. Furthermore, we can use an array > > > rather than doing a switch statement inside a structure. > > > > > > Reported-by: Neil Horman <nhorman at tuxdriver.com> > > > Signed-off-by: H. Peter Anvin <hpa at linux.intel.com> > > > Signed-off-by: Neil Horman <nhorman at tuxdriver.com> > > > > Looks good to me. > > > > Reviewed-by: H. Peter Anvin <hpa at linux.intel.com> > > > > -hpa > > Bump, did this get lost somewhere? Its been over a week and I don't see it > in the tree
No, it's not lost. But this patch is not trivial and there were 5 versions with acknowledgements in the middle. So I think it was not a bad idea to wait few days in order to be sure this version is OK :) -- Thomas
