From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755132Ab0DNLty (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Apr 2010 07:49:54 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:38556 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752775Ab0DNLtx (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Apr 2010 07:49:53 -0400 Organization: Red Hat UK Ltd. Registered Address: Red Hat UK Ltd, Amberley Place, 107-111 Peascod Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SI4 1TE, United Kingdom. Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No. 3798903 From: David Howells In-Reply-To: <20100406133026.GD20577@parisc-linux.org> References: <20100406133026.GD20577@parisc-linux.org> <20100326144241.8583.95617.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk> <28287.1269625325@redhat.com> <20100326175827.GD20055@linux-mips.org> To: Linus Torvalds , Matthew Wilcox Cc: dhowells@redhat.com, Ralf Baechle , mingo@elte.hu, tglx@linutronix.de, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] X86: Optimise fls(), ffs() and fls64() Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 12:49:20 +0100 Message-ID: <17213.1271245760@redhat.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Matthew Wilcox wrote: > I don't know whether we can get it /documented/, but the architect I > asked said "We'll never get away with reverting to the older behavior, > so in essence the architecture is set to not overwrite." Does that mean we can rely on it? Linus? David