From: Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com>
To: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
Cc: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
Ilie Halip <ilie.halip@gmail.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Vasily Gorbik <gor@linux.ibm.com>,
Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@linux.ibm.com>,
Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>,
Mete Durlu <meted@linux.ibm.com>,
Sven Schnelle <svens@linux.ibm.com>,
linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, llvm@lists.linux.dev,
Ulrich Weigand <Ulrich.Weigand@de.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] s390/test_unwind: use raw opcode instead of invalid instruction
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2021 12:09:20 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YZeF4JjWIcTMtaaT@osiris> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <658a63b5-2d18-2837-9639-75a14c959f73@de.ibm.com>
On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 11:57:05AM +0100, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> > > > > - " mvcl %%r1,%%r1\n"
> > > > > + " .insn e,0x0e11\n" /* mvcl %%r1,%%r1" */
> >
> > Sorry, I disagree with this. As you said above rr would be the correct
> > format for this instruction. If we go for the e format then we should
> > also use an instruction with e format.
> > Which in this case would simply be an illegal opcode, which would be
> > sufficient for what this code is good for: ".insn e,0x0000".
>
> Why not simply use .short then?
.short bypasses all sanity checks while .insn does not, so I think
that should be preferred. But I don't care too much.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-11-19 11:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-11-17 17:48 [PATCH] s390/test_unwind: use raw opcode instead of invalid instruction Ilie Halip
2021-11-19 1:10 ` Nick Desaulniers
2021-11-19 9:39 ` Christian Borntraeger
2021-11-19 9:44 ` Christian Borntraeger
2021-11-19 10:54 ` Heiko Carstens
2021-11-19 10:57 ` Christian Borntraeger
2021-11-19 11:09 ` Heiko Carstens [this message]
2021-11-19 14:12 ` Christian Borntraeger
2021-11-19 15:15 ` Heiko Carstens
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=YZeF4JjWIcTMtaaT@osiris \
--to=hca@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=Ulrich.Weigand@de.ibm.com \
--cc=agordeev@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
--cc=gor@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=ilie.halip@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=llvm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=meted@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=nathan@kernel.org \
--cc=ndesaulniers@google.com \
--cc=svens@linux.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.