lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Jan]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v3 5/6] x86/alternative: Use a single access in text_poke() where possible
On Thu, 10 Jan 2019 10:04:28 -0800
Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com> wrote:

> > What atomicity guarantee does the above require?
>
> I was asking in the context of static calls. My understanding is that
> the write to change the imm32 of the CALL needs to be atomic from a
> code fetch perspective so that we don't jump to a junk address.
>
> Or were you saying that Intel gave an official OK on text_poke_bp()?

Yes, the latter. I was talking about Intel giving the official OK for
text_poke_bp().

-- Steve

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-01-10 19:24    [W:0.085 / U:7.056 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site