> On Nov 20, 2018, at 10:23 AM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>
> On 11/20/18 10:18 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>> Can't we make this test in text_poke() directly, please?
>>
>> He does that in 9/10 iirc.
>
> No, in 9/10 he does that change locally for the jump_label, but there is
> absolutely no reason
On 11/20/18 10:18 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>
>> Can't we make this test in text_poke() directly, please?
>
> He does that in 9/10 iirc.
>
No, in 9/10 he does that change locally for the jump_label, but there is
absolutely no reason not to do that test in text_poke() proper, and
simply use text
On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 10:10:14AM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 11/13/18 5:07 AM, Nadav Amit wrote:
> > There is no apparent reason not to use text_poke_early() while we are
> > during early-init and we do not patch code that might be on the stack
> > (i.e., we'll return to the middle of the p
On 11/13/18 5:07 AM, Nadav Amit wrote:
> There is no apparent reason not to use text_poke_early() while we are
> during early-init and we do not patch code that might be on the stack
> (i.e., we'll return to the middle of the patched code). This appears to
> be the case of jump-labels, so do so.
>
There is no apparent reason not to use text_poke_early() while we are
during early-init and we do not patch code that might be on the stack
(i.e., we'll return to the middle of the patched code). This appears to
be the case of jump-labels, so do so.
This is required for the next patches that would
5 matches
Mail list logo
