[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <201208151303.47743.arnd@arndb.de>
Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 13:03:47 +0000
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
Cc: linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 03/31] arm64: Exception handling
On Tuesday 14 August 2012, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> +#ifdef CONFIG_AARCH32_EMULATION
> +#define compat_thumb_mode(regs) \
> + (((regs)->pstate & COMPAT_PSR_T_BIT))
> +#else
> +#define compat_thumb_mode(regs) (0)
> +#endif
The symbol we use on other platforms is CONFIG_COMPAT. I don't think you
need to have a separate CONFIG_AARCH32_EMULATION
> +void __bad_xchg(volatile void *ptr, int size)
> +{
> + printk("xchg: bad data size: pc 0x%p, ptr 0x%p, size %d\n",
> + __builtin_return_address(0), ptr, size);
> + BUG();
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(__bad_xchg);
> +
I think we're better off not defining this function. My guess is that
initially the idea on ARM was that it was meant as a BUILD_BUG_ON
replacement, but the someone added this function. And you copied it.
Microblaze has the same declaration, but (correctly) misses the
definition, which produces a much more helpful link failure than
a run-time BUG(). Using BUILD_BUG_ON would be even better.
Arnd
--
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