[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3d30d1e0-f60a-3f48-65d9-f53b76640a9d@gmx.de>
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2021 22:30:37 +0200
From: Helge Deller <deller@....de>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
Cc: Richard Henderson <rth@...ddle.net>,
Ivan Kokshaysky <ink@...assic.park.msu.ru>,
Matt Turner <mattst88@...il.com>,
"James E . J . Bottomley" <James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
alpha <linux-alpha@...r.kernel.org>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org, Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Sparse Mailing-list <linux-sparse@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] Introduce and use absolute_pointer macro
On 9/15/21 9:47 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 15, 2021 at 12:35 PM Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net> wrote:
>>
>> On a side note, we may revive the parisc patch. Helge isn't entirely
>> happy with the other solution for parisc; it is quite invasive and
>> touches a total of 19 files if I counted correctly.
>
> Ok, my suggestion to use the linker was not a "do it this way", it
> really was just a "maybe alternate approach". So no objections if
> absolute_pointer() ends up being the simpler solution.
Yes, it's a lot simpler and makes backporting patches later much easier.
I'll send a pull request with the updated parisc patch tomorrow.
Thanks,
Helge
Powered by blists - more mailing lists