On 02/27/2014 12:11 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>
> Hmm. This sort of goes against existing x86_32 practice where,
> AFAICT, things that need a particular calling convention specify
> asmlinkage and everything else uses regparm(3) if config/kbuild thinks
> it's appropriate.
>
That is not really
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 9:22 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 02/26/2014 09:19 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>>
>>> The normal ABI almost certainly makes more sense; as such -mregparm=3 is
>>> probably not what we want, and I suspect it makes more sense to just
>>> drop that from the CFLAGS line?
>>
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 9:22 PM, H. Peter Anvin h...@zytor.com wrote:
On 02/26/2014 09:19 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
The normal ABI almost certainly makes more sense; as such -mregparm=3 is
probably not what we want, and I suspect it makes more sense to just
drop that from the CFLAGS line?
On 02/27/2014 12:11 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
Hmm. This sort of goes against existing x86_32 practice where,
AFAICT, things that need a particular calling convention specify
asmlinkage and everything else uses regparm(3) if config/kbuild thinks
it's appropriate.
That is not really true
On 02/26/2014 09:19 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>
>> The normal ABI almost certainly makes more sense; as such -mregparm=3 is
>> probably not what we want, and I suspect it makes more sense to just
>> drop that from the CFLAGS line?
>
> Hmm. What happens on a native 32-bit build? IIRC the whole
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 10:06 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> On 02/26/2014 07:39 PM, Andi Kleen wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 05:02:13PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>> This makes no difference for 64-bit, bit it's critical for 32-bit code:
>>> these functions are called from outside the
On 02/26/2014 07:39 PM, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 05:02:13PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>> This makes no difference for 64-bit, bit it's critical for 32-bit code:
>> these functions are called from outside the kernel, so they need to comply
>> with the ABI.
>
> That's an odd
On 02/26/2014 07:39 PM, Andi Kleen wrote:
>
> Also you would rather need notrace more often.
>
Again, can be dealt with in CFLAGS, no?
-hpa
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 05:02:13PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> This makes no difference for 64-bit, bit it's critical for 32-bit code:
> these functions are called from outside the kernel, so they need to comply
> with the ABI.
That's an odd patch. If that was wrong things couldn't have
On 02/26/2014 05:02 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> This makes no difference for 64-bit, bit it's critical for 32-bit code:
> these functions are called from outside the kernel, so they need to comply
> with the ABI.
Or at least with *an* ABI (the i386 syscall vdso uses the syscall
convention, not
On 02/26/2014 05:02 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
This makes no difference for 64-bit, bit it's critical for 32-bit code:
these functions are called from outside the kernel, so they need to comply
with the ABI.
Or at least with *an* ABI (the i386 syscall vdso uses the syscall
convention, not the
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 05:02:13PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
This makes no difference for 64-bit, bit it's critical for 32-bit code:
these functions are called from outside the kernel, so they need to comply
with the ABI.
That's an odd patch. If that was wrong things couldn't have worked
On 02/26/2014 07:39 PM, Andi Kleen wrote:
Also you would rather need notrace more often.
Again, can be dealt with in CFLAGS, no?
-hpa
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info
On 02/26/2014 07:39 PM, Andi Kleen wrote:
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 05:02:13PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
This makes no difference for 64-bit, bit it's critical for 32-bit code:
these functions are called from outside the kernel, so they need to comply
with the ABI.
That's an odd patch. If
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 10:06 PM, H. Peter Anvin h...@zytor.com wrote:
On 02/26/2014 07:39 PM, Andi Kleen wrote:
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 05:02:13PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
This makes no difference for 64-bit, bit it's critical for 32-bit code:
these functions are called from outside the
On 02/26/2014 09:19 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
The normal ABI almost certainly makes more sense; as such -mregparm=3 is
probably not what we want, and I suspect it makes more sense to just
drop that from the CFLAGS line?
Hmm. What happens on a native 32-bit build? IIRC the whole kernel is
16 matches
Mail list logo
