From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "H. Peter Anvin" Subject: Re: [PATCH] xen/x86: Adjust stack pointer in xen_sysexit Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2015 13:55:15 -0800 Message-ID: <564A50C3.1000200__41530.1203182482$1447711039$gmane$org@zytor.com> References: <1447456706-24347-1-git-send-email-boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com> <56468D24.8030801@oracle.com> <564A0371.2040104@oracle.com> <20151116195906.GB20137@pd.tnic> <20151116202232.GC20137@pd.tnic> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20151116202232.GC20137@pd.tnic> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Borislav Petkov , Andy Lutomirski Cc: Boris Ostrovsky , David Vrabel , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , xen-devel List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 11/16/15 12:22, Borislav Petkov wrote: > > Huh, so what's wrong with a jump: > > jmp 1f > swapgs > 1: > What is the point of that jump? >> If it would make you feel better, it could be X86_BUG_XENPV :-p > > That doesn't matter - I just don't want to open the flood gates on > pseudo feature bits. > > hpa, what do you think? Pseudo feature bits are fine, we already have plenty of them. They make sense as they let us reuse a lot of infrastructure. -hpa