From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Florian Weimer Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] getcpu_cache system call: caching current CPU number (x86) Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2015 10:01:26 +0200 Message-ID: <55ADFC56.1040900@redhat.com> References: <1436724386-30909-1-git-send-email-mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> <55ACB2DC.5010503@redhat.com> <55AD14A4.6030101@redhat.com> <2010227315.699.1437438300542.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <2010227315.699.1437438300542.JavaMail.zimbra-vg+e7yoeK/dWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-api-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Mathieu Desnoyers , Linus Torvalds Cc: Andy Lutomirski , Ben Maurer , Ingo Molnar , libc-alpha , Andrew Morton , linux-api , =?UTF-8?B?T25kxZllaiBCw61sa2E=?= , rostedt , "Paul E. McKenney" , Josh Triplett , Paul Turner , Andrew Hunter , Peter Zijlstra List-Id: linux-api@vger.kernel.org On 07/21/2015 02:25 AM, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote: > But I'm inclined to think that some aspect of the question eludes me, > especially given the amount of interest generated by the gs-segment > selector approach. What am I missing ? %gs is not explicitly mentioned in the x86_64 psABI. This probably led to the assumption that it's unused. I think that's not the right conclusion to draw. -- Florian Weimer / Red Hat Product Security