On Fri, Nov 11, 2005 at 12:22:07PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, 11 Nov 2005, Zachary Amsden wrote:
> >
> > Yes, this is fine, but is it worth writing the feature discovery code? I
> > suppose it doesn't matter, as it gets jettisoned after init. I guess it is
> > just preference.
>
> Well, you could do the feature discovery by trying to take a fault early
> at boot-time. That's how we verify that write-protect works, and how we
> check that math exceptions come in the right way..
>
> > Could we consider doing the same with LOCK prefix for SMP kernels booted on
> > UP? Evil grin.
>
> Not so evil - I think it's been discussed. Not with alternates (not worth
> it), but it wouldn't be hard to do: just add a new section for "lock
> address", and have each inline asm that does a lock prefix do basically
>
> 1:
> lock ; xyzzy
>
> .section .lock.address
> .long 1b
> .previous
>
> and then just walk the ".lock.address" thing and turn all locks into 0x90
> (nop).
Looks like the Ubuntu people already did this...
http://www.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/bcollins/ubuntu-2.6.git;a=commitdiff;h=048985336e32efe665cddd348e92e4a4a5351415;hp=1cb630c2b5aaad7cedaa78aa135e6cecf5ab91ac
Dave
-
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/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
