Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1755536Ab2K2VTD (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Thu, 29 Nov 2012 16:19:03 -0500
Received: from mail.skyhub.de ([78.46.96.112]:41387 "EHLO mail.skyhub.de"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1753051Ab2K2VTA (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 29 Nov 2012 16:19:00 -0500
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2012 22:18:56 +0100
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@linux.intel.com>
Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Mario Gzuk <mariogzuk@technikz.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/8] x86, cleanups: Simplify sync_core() in the case of
 no CPUID
Message-ID: <20121129211856.GH30789@liondog.tnic>
Mail-Followup-To: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@linux.intel.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Mario Gzuk <mariogzuk@technikz.de>
References: <1354132230-21854-1-git-send-email-hpa@linux.intel.com>
 <1354132230-21854-9-git-send-email-hpa@linux.intel.com>
 <20121128204158.GC14635@liondog.tnic>
 <50B6A8F3.5000407@zytor.com>
 <20121129091317.GA21084@liondog.tnic>
 <50B7CE4C.80201@linux.intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <50B7CE4C.80201@linux.intel.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 756
Lines: 23

On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 01:06:20PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> It doesn't matter in that context, as the surrounding MSR references
> have barriers, but what I'm refering to is the "memory" barrier.

Ok, but the only difference between the two versions is this line:

        movl    %esi, %ecx      # tmp144, ecx

coming from the cpuid_eax() function. So the memory barrier is the same
and in the right place in both cases.

> The value of ECX doesn't matter when EAX=1.

Ok.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/