Messages in this thread |  | | From | "David S. Miller" <> | | Date | Wed, 13 Jun 2001 07:01:34 -0700 (PDT) | | Subject | Re: [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/
|  |