[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.1.10.0807241233450.3237@nehalem.linux-foundation.org>
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2008 12:36:38 -0700 (PDT)
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: [git pull] x86 fixes
On Thu, 24 Jul 2008, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> Hugh Dickins (1):
> x86: BUILD_IRQ say .text to avoid .data.percpu
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/irqinit_64.c b/arch/x86/kernel/irqinit_64.c
> index 0373e88..9414125 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/irqinit_64.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/irqinit_64.c
> @@ -43,7 +43,7 @@
>
> #define BUILD_IRQ(nr) \
> asmlinkage void IRQ_NAME(nr); \
> - asm("\n.p2align\n" \
> + asm("\n.text\n.p2align\n" \
> "IRQ" #nr "_interrupt:\n\t" \
> "push $~(" #nr ") ; " \
> "jmp common_interrupt");
I do not think this is a good idea AT ALL.
You need a ".previous" there too, otherwise any random C code that doesn't
_happen_ to change segments will now possibly put some random variable in
the .text segment.
And yes, dependign on just where the BUILD_IRQ() is, and what is around
it, and what compiler version we have, this bug may or may not show. But
it's still _wrong_.
I pulled it, will fix up by hand.
Linus
--
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