* Peter Zijlstra <pet...@infradead.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 03:56:55PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > * Borislav Petkov <b...@alien8.de> wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 01:43:52PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > > Something like the below.. someone needs to double check and possibly
> > > > add SNB/IVB EX parts if they're already available.
> > >
> > > Right, our friends at Intel would need to tell us which
> > > families/models does AAI65 span... if, this is actually the
> > > case.
> >
> > I think CLFLUSH should be pretty universally available, IIRC
> > graphics drivers were using it rather heavily in combination with
> > write-combining MTRRs, both on Linux and on Windows.
>
> The availability isn't the problem; the cost is. We shouldn't issue
> one if its not required. Only 'broken' EX hardware needs it.
Well, availability could be a problem too, if some CPU (real or
virtual) implements MWAIT but not CLFLUSH.
In theory we could make mwait an alternatives variant and patch in the
right combination of instructions? The CLFLUSH goes to the same
address as on which the monitoring happens, so it could be considered
one meta-instruction.
Thansk,
Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
