On 01/10/2014 03:16 AM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 6:06 PM, Borislav Petkov <b...@alien8.de> wrote:
>>
>> Tested-by: Borislav Petkov <b...@suse.de>
>
> Ok, good.
>
> Peter, do you want to take it (feel free to add my sign-off), or
> should I just commit it?
>
> Also, is there a way to have a "likely not true" version of that
> "static_cpu_has()"? There seems to be no way to make the non-K7/K8
> case the fallthrough code.. Not that this is likely that
> performance-critical, but..
>
I'll take it.
We don't have a "likely not true" version of static_cpu_has() at this
point... it would mean we couldn't do short jumps unfortunately (and
they would still take the false path until alternatives run.)
-hpa
--
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/
