>>> On 20.02.18 at 12:58, wrote:
> Having pv_soft_rdtsc() emulate all parts of an rdtscp is awkward, and gets in
> the way of some intended cleanup.
>
> * Drop the rdtscp parameter and always make the caller responsible for ecx
>updates when appropriate.
> * Switch the function from being v
On 20/02/18 16:04, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 11:58:41AM +, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> Having pv_soft_rdtsc() emulate all parts of an rdtscp is awkward, and gets in
>> the way of some intended cleanup.
>>
>> * Drop the rdtscp parameter and always make the caller responsible
On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 11:58:41AM +, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> Having pv_soft_rdtsc() emulate all parts of an rdtscp is awkward, and gets in
> the way of some intended cleanup.
>
> * Drop the rdtscp parameter and always make the caller responsible for ecx
>updates when appropriate.
> * Swi
On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 11:58:41AM +, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> Having pv_soft_rdtsc() emulate all parts of an rdtscp is awkward, and gets in
> the way of some intended cleanup.
>
> * Drop the rdtscp parameter and always make the caller responsible for ecx
>updates when appropriate.
> * Swi
Having pv_soft_rdtsc() emulate all parts of an rdtscp is awkward, and gets in
the way of some intended cleanup.
* Drop the rdtscp parameter and always make the caller responsible for ecx
updates when appropriate.
* Switch the function from being void, and return the main timestamp in the
r
