[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4B3C1363.7000009@cn.fujitsu.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2009 10:58:43 +0800
From: Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@...fujitsu.com>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
CC: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...e.de>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
"Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] x86: record relocation offset
Hi Peter,
Thanks for you review and tell us the better way to get relocation offset.
H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>
> The first I saw of this thread was a proposed patch that would give the
> relocation offset of the monolithic kernel, both on 32 and 64 bits,
> without any explanation of the usage model. As such, from my point of
> view this has always been about the monolithic kernel, until your post
> mentioned modules (which the proposed patch would have done nothing about.)
>
We no need care modules symbols since we get module load address from
'/proc/modules', no matter is relocated or not. And perf tools just use
this way. So, it done nothing about it in my patch, maybe i should mention
it in my patch's changlog
Thanks,
Xiao
--
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