Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 01 Mar 2007 16:52:57 -0800 | From | Zachary Amsden <> | Subject | Re: [patch 12/26] Xen-paravirt_ops: Fix patch site clobbers to include return register |
| |
Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > Zachary Amsden wrote: > >> Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: >> >>> Fix a few clobbers to include the return register. The clobbers set >>> is the set of all registers modified (or may be modified) by the code >>> snippet, regardless of whether it was deliberate or accidental. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xensource.com> >>> Cc: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au> >>> Cc: Zachary Amsden <zach@vmware.com> >>> >>> --- >>> include/asm-i386/paravirt.h | 4 ++-- >>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>> >>> =================================================================== >>> --- a/include/asm-i386/paravirt.h >>> +++ b/include/asm-i386/paravirt.h >>> @@ -556,7 +556,7 @@ static inline unsigned long __raw_local_ >>> "popl %%edx; popl %%ecx") >>> : "=a"(f): "m"(paravirt_ops.save_fl), >>> paravirt_type(PARAVIRT_PATCH(save_fl)), >>> - paravirt_clobber(CLBR_NONE) >>> + paravirt_clobber(CLBR_EAX) >>> : "memory", "cc"); >>> return f; >>> >>> >> Has this been tested on older gcc's? I seem to recall them barfing >> over things like this. >> > > Things like what? Do you mean the %[foo] asm parameter syntax? I think > those versions are no longer supported - Arjan posted a patch a few days > ago to convert a pile of asms to this form. Or do you mean something else? >
I meant having an output in the clobber list, I didn't know we were dropping support for older versions already.
Zach - 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/
| |