On Tue, 8 May 2001, Alan Cox wrote:
>
> I dont see where the alternative patch ensures the user didnt flip the
> direction flag for one
Yeah.
We might as well just make it "eflags & IF", none of the other flags
should matter (or we explicitly want them cleared).
Linus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Re: [PATCH] x86 page fault handler not... Linus Torvalds
- Re: [PATCH] x86 page fault handle... David Woodhouse
- Re: [PATCH] x86 page fault handle... Anton Altaparmakov
- Re: [PATCH] x86 page fault handle... Brian Gerst
- Re: [PATCH] x86 page fault ha... Linus Torvalds
- Re: [PATCH] x86 page fault ha... Nigel Gamble
- Re: [PATCH] x86 page fault ha... Brian Gerst
- Re: [PATCH] x86 page fault ha... Linus Torvalds
- Re: [PATCH] x86 page fault ha... Brian Gerst
- Re: [PATCH] x86 page fault ha... Alan Cox
- Re: [PATCH] x86 page fault ha... Linus Torvalds
- Re: [PATCH] x86 page fault ha... Brian Gerst
- Re: [PATCH] x86 page fault ha... Nigel Gamble
- Re: [PATCH] x86 page fault handle... Jesper Juhl
- Re: [PATCH] x86 page fault handle... Alan Cox
- Re: [PATCH] x86 page fault handler not interru... Linus Torvalds
- RE: [PATCH] x86 page fault handler not interrupt safe Dunlap, Randy
- Re: [PATCH] x86 page fault handler not interrupt s... David Woodhouse
- RE: [PATCH] x86 page fault handler not interrupt s... Anton Altaparmakov
- Re: [PATCH] x86 page fault handler not interrupt safe Anton Altaparmakov

