This is the mail archive of the
binutils@sourceware.org
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: [PATCH] x86: drop redundant SYSCALL/SYSRET templates
- From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich at suse dot com>
- To: "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>
- Cc: "binutils at sourceware dot org" <binutils at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2019 14:19:47 +0100
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: drop redundant SYSCALL/SYSRET templates
- References: <34aba8af-9287-beea-03b3-7442134f1a31@suse.com> <CAMe9rOqNAO0VMAPXOJL18ke3sKOmzKPm1nu29XLWPVQ=oWs0uw@mail.gmail.com> <f8d8f4c9-771b-0b32-b01e-b06ee82d9cae@suse.com> <CAMe9rOrehd6ELsCEkgmMNwO-BbfO5Mus==q142L2jzZjMt9A0Q@mail.gmail.com>
On 12.11.2019 21:45, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 11, 2019 at 11:19 PM Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 11.11.2019 18:15, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>> On Mon, Nov 11, 2019 at 4:01 AM Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> wrote:
>>>> --- a/opcodes/i386-opc.tbl
>>>> +++ b/opcodes/i386-opc.tbl
>>>> @@ -2797,9 +2797,7 @@ pswapd, 2, 0xf0f, 0xbb, 2, Cpu3dnowA, Mo
>>>>
>>>> // AMD extensions.
>>>> syscall, 0, 0xf05, None, 2, CpuSYSCALL, No_bSuf|No_wSuf|No_lSuf|No_sSuf|No_qSuf|No_ldSuf, { 0 }
>>>> -syscall, 0, 0xf05, None, 2, Cpu64, No_bSuf|No_wSuf|No_lSuf|No_sSuf|No_qSuf|No_ldSuf, { 0 }
>>>> sysret, 0, 0xf07, None, 2, CpuSYSCALL, DefaultSize|No_bSuf|No_wSuf|No_sSuf|No_ldSuf, { 0 }
>>>> -sysret, 0, 0xf07, None, 2, Cpu64, DefaultSize|No_bSuf|No_wSuf|No_sSuf|No_ldSuf, { 0 }
>>>> swapgs, 0, 0xf01f8, None, 3, Cpu64, No_bSuf|No_wSuf|No_lSuf|No_sSuf|No_qSuf|No_ldSuf, { 0 }
>>>> rdtscp, 0, 0xf01f9, None, 3, CpuRdtscp, No_bSuf|No_wSuf|No_lSuf|No_sSuf|No_qSuf|No_ldSuf, { 0 }
>>>
>>> Can you add a testcase?
>>
>> The insns are being tested already, so I wonder what you want to be
>> tested in addition. What completely lacks testing are SYSENTER/SYSEXIT.
>
> That is fine then.
I'll take this as an OK to the original patch then.
Thanks, Jan