[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080410144114.GH10019@one.firstfloor.org>
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2008 16:41:14 +0200
From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: Andy Whitcroft <apw@...dowen.org>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, akpm@...l.org,
Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
Glauber de Oliveira Costa <gcosta@...hat.com>,
Jan Beulich <jbeulich@...ell.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, pinskia@....gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pop previous section in alternative.c
> I would say anytime there's a "^+.*\.section" there had better be a
> "^-.*\.section" or a "+.*.previous" matching it. Off hand I can't think o
> any exceptions to this rule although I may be wrong.
Second section is wrong because the compiler expects that the same
section is active afterwards and that can be different ones (like
init.text vs normal text)
Also pushsection/popsection is also valid
So in summary valid section patterns are either
.section / .previous or .pushsection .section .popsection
-Andi
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists