[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090325122241.GE11571@elte.hu>
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2009 13:22:41 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Cc: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>, rusty@...tcorp.com.au,
tglx@...utronix.de, x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
hpa@...or.com, Paul Mundt <lethal@...ux-sh.org>,
rmk@....linux.org.uk, starvik@...s.com, ralf@...ux-mips.org,
davem@...emloft.net, cooloney@...nel.org, kyle@...artin.ca,
matthew@....cx, grundler@...isc-linux.org, takata@...ux-m32r.org,
benh@...nel.crashing.org, rth@...ddle.net,
ink@...assic.park.msu.ru, heiko.carstens@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: [GIT RFC] percpu: use dynamic percpu allocator as the default
percpu allocator
* Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> wrote:
> > With your patches and a RELOC_HIDE version that uses the GOTENT
> > indirection the kernel won't compile because the "X" constraint
> > for the GOTENT access needs a symbol and there are quite a few
> > users that pass a pointer. I do not see a simple solution for
> > that problem yet.
>
> Ah... okay. Now I get it. It wasn't expecting variables there. How
> about doing the following?
>
> #define SHIFT_PERCPU_PTR(ptr, offset) (({ \
> if (__builtin_constant_p(ptr)) \
> do GOTENT trick; \
> else \
> RELOC_HIDE(); \
> }))
>
> Thanks.
Btw., is there any intermediate fix/workaround i could apply
perhaps? I'd like to send the percpu bits early in the merge window
and would hate to break Martin's arch ...
Ingo
--
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