[PATCH 3/6] x86: Add support for the clwb instruction

[Borislav Petkov]

On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 12:40:00PM -0700, Ross Zwisler wrote:
> Yep, it's weird, I know.  :)

But sure, saving opcode space, makes sense to me.

Btw, I'd still be interested about this:

> +static inline void clwb(volatile void *__p)
> +{
> +     alternative_io_2(".byte " __stringify(NOP_DS_PREFIX) "; clflush %P0",

Any particular reason for using 0x3e as a prefix to have the insns be
the same size or is it simply because CLFLUSH can stomach it?

Thanks.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine.
--