lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [Jun]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [patch] 2.4.6-pre3 unresolved symbol do_softirq

Keith Owens writes:
> It works for integers but call do_softirq is more of a problem. I
> could not find an asm constraint that generated correct code in a
> single instruction. The closest I could get was
> __asm__("call *%%eax" : : "a" (do_softirq));
> The 'obvious'
> __asm__("call %0" : : "m" (do_softirq));
> calls to a location that contains the address of do_softirq, oops.
>
> Any other architectures that call do_softirq inside asm would need
> similar hard coding of indirect branches. It is simpler to export
> do_softirq with no version, and have cleaner asm.

Why doesn't this work on x86?

#define my_symbol my_symbol_versioned
extern void my_symbol(void);

__asm__("call %0" : : "i" (my_symbol));

Later,
David S. Miller
davem@redhat.com
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:55    [W:0.059 / U:0.360 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site