public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@gmail.com>
Cc: x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@kernel.org>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86/segment: Introduce storesegment() helper to write segment selectors to memory
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2026 08:56:49 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <actwMQFHpYvAfUqm@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260331063838.108857-1-ubizjak@gmail.com>


* Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@gmail.com> wrote:

> Introduce a new helper, storesegment(), that stores a segment selector
> directly into a u16 (or compatible) memory location without using an
> intermediate general-purpose register.
> 
> To support this, split the existing SAVE_SEGMENT macro into two parts:
> 
> SAVE_SEGMENT_VAR(): retains the current behavior of reading a segment
> register into an unsigned long via a register.
> SAVE_SEGMENT_PTR(): adds a new variant that writes the 16-bit selector
> directly to memory.
> 
> The combined SAVE_SEGMENT() macro now generates both helpers for each
> segment register.
> 
> The new storesegment() interface is preferred over savesegment() when
> the value only needs to be stored (e.g. into a struct field), avoiding
> an unnecessary register move and making the intent clearer.
> 
> No functional change for existing users of savesegment().

Why does the API have to be split into =r and =m variants?

Coulnd't we use a more generic constraint and let the compiler
decide what the target is? Would that negatively impact
other aspects of code generation?

Thanks,

	Ingo

  parent reply	other threads:[~2026-03-31  6:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-03-31  6:38 [PATCH 1/2] x86/segment: Introduce storesegment() helper to write segment selectors to memory Uros Bizjak
2026-03-31  6:38 ` [PATCH 2/2] x86/process: Use storesegment() when saving segment selectors Uros Bizjak
2026-03-31  6:56 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2026-03-31  9:53   ` [PATCH 1/2] x86/segment: Introduce storesegment() helper to write segment selectors to memory Uros Bizjak
2026-03-31  9:59     ` Uros Bizjak
2026-04-01  6:40     ` Ingo Molnar
2026-04-01  6:59       ` Uros Bizjak
2026-04-01  7:02         ` Ingo Molnar

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=actwMQFHpYvAfUqm@gmail.com \
    --to=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tglx@kernel.org \
    --cc=ubizjak@gmail.com \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox