[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH 5/5 v2 gnumach] x86_64: add 64-bit syscall entry point
From: |
Samuel Thibault |
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH 5/5 v2 gnumach] x86_64: add 64-bit syscall entry point |
Date: |
Thu, 2 Mar 2023 15:17:55 +0100 |
User-agent: |
NeoMutt/20170609 (1.8.3) |
Luca Dariz, le jeu. 02 mars 2023 14:54:51 +0100, a ecrit:
> we could even sum up the discussion above with:
>
> : "memory" /* wrmsr is a Serializing Instruction,
> * therefore we need serialization from the
> * compiler too */
It is the 'therefore' word which poses problem to me: it's not the
*fact* that it is a serialization instruction which makes us want
to tell the compiler to serialize. It is the *reason* why that is a
serialization which makes us want to.
Sergey's proposal doesn't have this potential of misled interpretation,
for instance.
Samuel
- [PATCH 5/5 v2 gnumach] x86_64: add 64-bit syscall entry point, Luca Dariz, 2023/03/01
- Re: [PATCH 5/5 v2 gnumach] x86_64: add 64-bit syscall entry point, Samuel Thibault, 2023/03/01
- Re: [PATCH 5/5 v2 gnumach] x86_64: add 64-bit syscall entry point, Luca Dariz, 2023/03/02
- Re: [PATCH 5/5 v2 gnumach] x86_64: add 64-bit syscall entry point, Samuel Thibault, 2023/03/02
- Re: [PATCH 5/5 v2 gnumach] x86_64: add 64-bit syscall entry point, Samuel Thibault, 2023/03/02
- Re: [PATCH 5/5 v2 gnumach] x86_64: add 64-bit syscall entry point, Luca Dariz, 2023/03/02
- Re: [PATCH 5/5 v2 gnumach] x86_64: add 64-bit syscall entry point, Samuel Thibault, 2023/03/02
- Re: [PATCH 5/5 v2 gnumach] x86_64: add 64-bit syscall entry point, Sergey Bugaev, 2023/03/02
- Re: [PATCH 5/5 v2 gnumach] x86_64: add 64-bit syscall entry point, Luca Dariz, 2023/03/02
- Re: [PATCH 5/5 v2 gnumach] x86_64: add 64-bit syscall entry point,
Samuel Thibault <=
[PATCH v3 gnumach] x86_64: add 64-bit syscall entry point, Luca Dariz, 2023/03/08