On 05/03/2014 04:24 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Fri, 02 May 2014 21:03:10 -0700
> "H. Peter Anvin" <h...@zytor.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> I'd really like to see a workload which would genuinely benefit before
>> adding more complexity. Now... if we can determine that it doesn't harm
>> anything and would solve the NMI nesting problem cleaner than the
>> current solution, that would justify things, too...
>>
>
> As I stated before. It doesn't solve the NMI nesting problem. It only
> handles page faults. We would have to implement this for breakpoint
> return paths too. Is that a plan as well?
>
I would assume we would do it for *ALL* the IRETs. There are only three
IRETs in the kernel last I checked...
-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/
