On 02/24/2015 01:48 PM, Ross Zwisler wrote:
> On Tue, 2015-02-24 at 13:41 -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> On 02/24/2015 01:40 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>>> On 02/24/2015 01:30 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 03:14:01PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> That may cause the
On Tue, 2015-02-24 at 13:41 -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 02/24/2015 01:40 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> > On 02/24/2015 01:30 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> >> On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 03:14:01PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> >>> That may cause the same line to be flushed twice. I would suggest,
On 02/24/2015 01:40 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 02/24/2015 01:30 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 03:14:01PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>>> That may cause the same line to be flushed twice. I would suggest,
>>> instead, also removing the arithmetic on void *:
>>
>> Btw,
On 02/24/2015 01:30 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 03:14:01PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> That may cause the same line to be flushed twice. I would suggest,
>> instead, also removing the arithmetic on void *:
>
> Btw, should we hold down all those suggested usages
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 03:14:01PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> That may cause the same line to be flushed twice. I would suggest,
> instead, also removing the arithmetic on void *:
Btw, should we hold down all those suggested usages somewhere in
Documentation/x86/ as commit messages are
On 02/24/2015 01:40 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
On 02/24/2015 01:30 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 03:14:01PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
That may cause the same line to be flushed twice. I would suggest,
instead, also removing the arithmetic on void *:
Btw, should we
On 02/24/2015 01:30 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 03:14:01PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
That may cause the same line to be flushed twice. I would suggest,
instead, also removing the arithmetic on void *:
Btw, should we hold down all those suggested usages somewhere in
On 02/24/2015 01:48 PM, Ross Zwisler wrote:
On Tue, 2015-02-24 at 13:41 -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
On 02/24/2015 01:40 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
On 02/24/2015 01:30 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 03:14:01PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
That may cause the same line to be
On Tue, 2015-02-24 at 13:41 -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
On 02/24/2015 01:40 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
On 02/24/2015 01:30 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 03:14:01PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
That may cause the same line to be flushed twice. I would suggest,
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 03:14:01PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
That may cause the same line to be flushed twice. I would suggest,
instead, also removing the arithmetic on void *:
Btw, should we hold down all those suggested usages somewhere in
Documentation/x86/ as commit messages are
On 02/20/2015 02:31 AM, tip-bot for Ross Zwisler wrote:
>
> This function shows how to properly use clwb/clflushopt/clflush
> and pcommit with appropriate fencing:
>
> void flush_and_commit_buffer(void *vaddr, unsigned int size)
> {
> void *vend = vaddr + size - 1;
>
> for (; vaddr
On 02/20/2015 02:31 AM, tip-bot for Ross Zwisler wrote:
This function shows how to properly use clwb/clflushopt/clflush
and pcommit with appropriate fencing:
void flush_and_commit_buffer(void *vaddr, unsigned int size)
{
void *vend = vaddr + size - 1;
for (; vaddr vend;
Commit-ID: 719d359dc7b6be3e43d6661f192ceb980b10ee26
Gitweb: http://git.kernel.org/tip/719d359dc7b6be3e43d6661f192ceb980b10ee26
Author: Ross Zwisler
AuthorDate: Thu, 19 Feb 2015 10:37:28 -0700
Committer: Ingo Molnar
CommitDate: Fri, 20 Feb 2015 09:43:36 +0100
x86/asm: Add support for
Commit-ID: 719d359dc7b6be3e43d6661f192ceb980b10ee26
Gitweb: http://git.kernel.org/tip/719d359dc7b6be3e43d6661f192ceb980b10ee26
Author: Ross Zwisler ross.zwis...@linux.intel.com
AuthorDate: Thu, 19 Feb 2015 10:37:28 -0700
Committer: Ingo Molnar mi...@kernel.org
CommitDate: Fri, 20 Feb
14 matches
Mail list logo
