Commit dd78b97367 ("x86, boot: Move CPU
flags out of cpucheck") introduced ambiguous inline asm in the
has_eflag() function. In 16-bit mode want the instruction to be
'pushfl', but we just say 'pushf' and hope the compiler does what we
wanted.
When building with 'clang -m16', it won't, because clang doesn't use
the horrid '.code16gcc' hack that even 'gcc -m16' uses internally.
Say what we mean and don't make the compiler make assumptions.
[ hpa: ideally we would be able to use the gcc %zN construct here, but
that is broken for 64-bit integers in gcc < 4.5.
The code with plain "pushf/popf" is fine for 32- or 64-bit mode, but
not for 16-bit mode; in 16-bit mode those are 16-bit instructions in
.code16 mode, and 32-bit instructions in .code16gcc mode. ]
Signed-off-by: David Woodhouse <David.Woodhouse@intel.com>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1391079628.26079.82.camel@shinybook.infradead.org
Signed-off-by: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@linux.intel.com>
When a function is used in more than one file it may not be possible
to immediately tell from context what the intended meaning is. As
such, it is more important that the naming be self-evident. Thus,
change get_flags() to get_cpuflags().
For consistency, change check_flags() to check_cpuflags() even though
it is only used in cpucheck.c.
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1381450698-28710-2-git-send-email-keescook@chromium.org
Signed-off-by: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@linux.intel.com>
Refactor the CPU flags handling out of the cpucheck routines so that
they can be reused by the future ASLR routines (in order to detect CPU
features like RDRAND and RDTSC).
This reworks has_eflag() and has_fpu() to be used on both 32-bit and
64-bit, and refactors the calls to cpuid to make them PIC-safe on 32-bit.
Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1381450698-28710-2-git-send-email-keescook@chromium.org
Signed-off-by: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@linux.intel.com>
David Woodhouse