Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] x86/hash: fix build failure with older binutils

2014-02-27 Thread Daniel Borkmann
On 02/27/2014 09:47 AM, Jan Beulich wrote: Just like for other ISA extension instruction uses we should check whether the assembler actually supports them. The fallback here simply is to encode an instruction with fixed operands (%eax and %ecx). Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich Cc: Francesco Fusco

[PATCH v2 1/3] x86/hash: fix build failure with older binutils

2014-02-27 Thread Jan Beulich
Just like for other ISA extension instruction uses we should check whether the assembler actually supports them. The fallback here simply is to encode an instruction with fixed operands (%eax and %ecx). Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich Cc: Francesco Fusco Cc: Daniel Borkmann Cc: Thomas Graf Cc:

[PATCH v2 1/3] x86/hash: fix build failure with older binutils

2014-02-27 Thread Jan Beulich
Just like for other ISA extension instruction uses we should check whether the assembler actually supports them. The fallback here simply is to encode an instruction with fixed operands (%eax and %ecx). Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich jbeul...@suse.com Cc: Francesco Fusco ffu...@redhat.com Cc: Daniel

Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] x86/hash: fix build failure with older binutils

2014-02-27 Thread Daniel Borkmann
On 02/27/2014 09:47 AM, Jan Beulich wrote: Just like for other ISA extension instruction uses we should check whether the assembler actually supports them. The fallback here simply is to encode an instruction with fixed operands (%eax and %ecx). Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich jbeul...@suse.com Cc: