Re: x86: fix rdrand asm()

[Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1179 bytes --]

On 25/09/13 16:46, Jan Beulich wrote:
> Just learned the hard way that at least for non-volatile asm()s gcc
> indeed does what the documentation says: It may move it across jumps
> (i.e. ahead of the cpu_has() check). While the documentation claims
> that this can also happen for volatile asm()s, if that was the case
> we'd have many more problems in our code (and e,g, Linux would too).
>
> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
>
> --- a/xen/include/asm-x86/random.h
> +++ b/xen/include/asm-x86/random.h
> @@ -8,7 +8,7 @@ static inline unsigned int arch_get_rand
>      unsigned int val = 0;
>  
>      if ( cpu_has(&current_cpu_data, X86_FEATURE_RDRAND) )
> -        asm ( ".byte 0x0f,0xc7,0xf0" : "+a" (val) );
> +        __asm__ __volatile__ ( ".byte 0x0f,0xc7,0xf0" : "+a" (val) );

Any reason for using the double underscore versions?  They have
identical meanings, and the prevailing style does appear to be without.

Either way,

Reviewed-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>

>  
>      return val;
>  }
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
> http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel


[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 2114 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 126 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel