Re: [patch] x86: rename is_at_popf(), add iret to tests and fix insn length

On Wednesday 02 August 2006 14:37, Chuck Ebbert wrote:
> is_at_popf() needs to test for the iret instruction as well as
> popf.  So add that test and rename it to is_setting_trap_flag().

Do you have a single real example where anybody is actually using IRET
in user space? 

-Andi

-
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/

References:
- [patch] x86: rename is_at_popf(), add iret to tests and fix insn length
  - From: Chuck Ebbert <[email protected]>

Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] simplify update_times (avoid jiffies/jiffies_64 aliasing problem)
Next by Date: Re: [PATCH 1 of 13] Add apply_to_page_range() which applies a function to a pte range
Previous by thread: [patch] x86: rename is_at_popf(), add iret to tests and fix insn length
Next by thread: Re: [patch] x86: rename is_at_popf(), add iret to tests and fix insn length
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[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]