[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ff13bc9a1002181538q7ccc1381x32a2f25bfb6d56cc@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2010 00:38:48 +0100
From: Luca Barbieri <luca@...a-barbieri.com>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc: mingo@...e.hu, a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/10] x86: add support for relative CALL and JMP in
alternatives
> The existing instruction parser is only present if KPROBES is configured
> in... this patch would make it obligatory. Your patch doesn't reflect
> that. Furthermore, it is ~16K of code and data which probably will make
> embedded people unhappy... although perhaps isn't out of line.
Didn't notice that.
> A good question, though, is if we actually need support for JMP or CALL
> as anything but the first instruction (usually the *only* instruction),
> which would make it a lot easier...
Probably not.
I think an even better option is to create a CALL if replacementlen is 0xff.
This would save some space for each callsite and make it clear we only
support this usage.
--
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