>In message <15504.7958.677592.908691@napali.hpl.hp.com> you write:
>
>>OK, I see this. Unfortunately, HIDE_RELOC() causes me problems
>>because it prevents me from taking the address of a per-CPU variable.
>>This is useful when you have a per-CPU structure (e.g., cpu_info).
>>Perhaps there should/could be a version of HIDE_RELOC() that doesn't
>>dereference the resulting address?
>>
>
>Yep, valid point. Patch below: please play.
>
>diff -urN -I \$.*\$ --exclude TAGS -X /home/rusty/devel/kernel/kernel-patches/current-dontdiff --minimal linux-2.5.7-pre1/include/linux/compiler.h working-2.5.7-pre1-nfarp/include/linux/compiler.h
>--- linux-2.5.7-pre1/include/linux/compiler.h Fri Mar 8 14:49:29 2002
>+++ working-2.5.7-pre1-nfarp/include/linux/compiler.h Thu Mar 14 15:32:38 2002
>@@ -13,10 +13,4 @@
> #define likely(x) __builtin_expect((x),1)
> #define unlikely(x) __builtin_expect((x),0)
>
>-/* This macro obfuscates arithmetic on a variable address so that gcc
>- shouldn't recognize the original var, and make assumptions about it */
>-#define RELOC_HIDE(var, off) \
>- ({ __typeof__(&(var)) __ptr; \
>- __asm__ ("" : "=g"(__ptr) : "0"((void *)&(var) + (off))); \
>- *__ptr; })
> #endif /* __LINUX_COMPILER_H */
>diff -urN -I \$.*\$ --exclude TAGS -X /home/rusty/devel/kernel/kernel-patches/current-dontdiff --minimal linux-2.5.7-pre1/include/linux/percpu.h working-2.5.7-pre1-nfarp/include/linux/percpu.h
>--- linux-2.5.7-pre1/include/linux/percpu.h Thu Jan 1 10:00:00 1970
>+++ working-2.5.7-pre1-nfarp/include/linux/percpu.h Thu Mar 14 15:32:44 2002
>@@ -0,0 +1,28 @@
>+#ifndef __LINUX_PERCPU_H
>+#define __LINUX_PERCPU_H
>+
>+/* This macro obfuscates arithmetic on a variable address so that gcc
>+ shouldn't recognize the original var, and make assumptions about it */
>+#define RELOC_HIDE(ptr, off) \
>+ ({ __typeof__(ptr) __ptr; \
>+ __asm__ ("" : "=g"(__ptr) : "0"((void *)(ptr) + (off))); \
>+ __ptr; })
>
Your other changes look good, but RELOC_HIDE really does belong in
compiler.h... and percpu.h is a particularly poor choice of destination.
Why not satisfy DavidM's objection by creating (or stating you allow
the creation of) __RELOC_HIDE or similar. Or perhaps call your version
__RELOC_HIDE, if yours is not the normal case?
It really shouldn't be moved from where it belongs, linux/compiler.h...
Jeff
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/