lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Dec]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [more markup]  [less markup]  [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH] x86: Unify include/asm-x86/linkage_[32|64].h
FromHarvey Harrison <>
DateTue, 04 Dec 2007 14:57:55 -0800
On Tue, 2007-12-04 at 23:45 +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 04, 2007 at 11:27:17PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > 
> > * Harvey Harrison <harvey.harrison@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > On Tue, 2007-12-04 at 22:32 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > > * Harvey Harrison <harvey.harrison@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > I'm not sure if the definition of asmlinkage and prevent_tail_call can 
> > > > > be omitted as well and let the linux/linkage.h version get picked up 
> > > > > instead.
> > > > 
> > > > no, we cannot remove them - asmlinkage is needed for the syscall 
> > > > entry (and other entry code) to work, the and the prevent_tail_call 
> > > > works around a compiler bug. (which might or might not be fixed in 
> > > > latest gcc - but we generally dont remove workarounds unless we are 
> > > > really sure it's fine.)
> > > 
> > > OK, but if this patch is acceptable, then there is no more places in 
> > > the tree that define the FASTCALL macro, other than the empty default 
> > > in include/linux/linkage.h.  So I think a second step would be to 
> > > start to get rid of FASTCALL callers elsewhere in the tree...thoughts?
> > 
> > the removal of FASTCALL is fine: the default (and only) compiler model 
> > for x86 (32-bit) is regparm(3), so the regparm(3) macro is equivalent to 
> > the empty one in linux/linkage.h.
> >...
> 
> But please ensure that they stay in assembler code also used by UML.

I'm curious how UML is using FASTCALL/fastcall.  Any pointers?

Harvey



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-12-05 00:07    [from the cache]
©2003-2008