From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755945Ab0JEQyB (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Oct 2010 12:54:01 -0400 Received: from mail.skyhub.de ([78.46.96.112]:48140 "EHLO mail.skyhub.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755926Ab0JEQx7 (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Oct 2010 12:53:59 -0400 Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2010 18:53:56 +0200 From: Borislav Petkov To: "H. Peter Anvin" Cc: hpa@zytor.com, linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@redhat.com, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, ryan@innosecc.com, tglx@linutronix.de Subject: Re: [tip:x86/cpu] x86, cpu: Fix X86_FEATURE_NOPL Message-ID: <20101005165356.GA6569@a1.tnic> Mail-Followup-To: Borislav Petkov , "H. Peter Anvin" , hpa@zytor.com, linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@redhat.com, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, ryan@innosecc.com, tglx@linutronix.de References: <20101004073127.GA20305@liondog.tnic> <20101005094712.GA5626@a1.tnic> <4CAB52AD.60502@linux.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4CAB52AD.60502@linux.intel.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: "H. Peter Anvin" Date: Tue, Oct 05, 2010 at 09:30:37AM -0700 > On 10/5/2010 2:47 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote: > > > >tag it for -stable too? > > > > What is the flaw that justifies it for stable, or even .36? It > seems relatively harmless, with at most a very minor performance > issue, unless I'm missing something? I was thinking more along the lines of this being partially broken when supplying non-constant arguments to cpu_has(), something like , for example. But all this could cause is /proc/cpuinfo not to report the "nopl" feature bit. I guess this is too minor an issue to even to be considered for stable. -- Regards/Gruss, Boris.