On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 02:19:18PM +, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> > > > .align 11
> > > > -ENTRY(__bp_harden_hyp_vecs_start)
> > > > +SYM_CODE_START_NOALIGN(__bp_harden_hyp_vecs)
> > > > +SYM_INNER_LABEL(__bp_harden_hyp_vecs_start, SYM_L_GLOBAL)
> > > Why isn't SYM_CODE_START_NOALIGN enoug
On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 02:19:18PM +, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On 2020-02-14 11:40, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 09:36:56PM +, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> > > On 2020-02-13 15:38, Mark Brown wrote:
> > > > .align 11
> > > > -ENTRY(__bp_harden_hyp_vecs_start)
> > > > +SYM_C
On 2020-02-14 11:40, Mark Brown wrote:
On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 09:36:56PM +, Marc Zyngier wrote:
On 2020-02-13 15:38, Mark Brown wrote:
> -ENTRY(__kvm_call_hyp)
> +SYM_FUNC_START(__kvm_call_hyp)
I'm not convinced by this particular change. _kvm_call_hyp is called
directly from
C, and b
On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 09:36:56PM +, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On 2020-02-13 15:38, Mark Brown wrote:
> > -ENTRY(__kvm_call_hyp)
> > +SYM_FUNC_START(__kvm_call_hyp)
> I'm not convinced by this particular change. _kvm_call_hyp is called
> directly from
> C, and behaves almost like a normal functi
Hi Mark,
On 2020-02-13 15:38, Mark Brown wrote:
In an effort to clarify and simplify the annotation of assembly
functions
in the kernel new macros have been introduced. These replace ENTRY and
ENDPROC with separate annotations for standard C callable functions,
data and code with different call
