Question about PPC __put_user_asm/__get_user_asm

[Graham Stoney]

Gabriel Paubert writes:
> At least i386 does the same trick as Documentation/exception.txt explains.
> But using .text explicitly is bad style in any case, you might want to
> replace it by .previous like in this hand-built unified diff for the
> __put_user_asm case:

Thanks Gabriel; I must have been going blind yesterday when I looked at the
i386 uaccess.h file to not notice this!

> Caution: I don't claim it will solve all your problems: actually it will
> still leave some remnants in the __ex_table and .fixup sectioons which
> will be cause linker errors. But at least the code of the functions will
> stay in the appropriate section. I've no idea on how to generate per
> function __ex_table and fixup sections (actually I think it's the wrong
> approach for 6xx/7xx/7xxx PPC for other reasons).

I don't believe we want per-function __ex_table and .fixup sections, so I
think using .previous in the __get_user_asm & __put_user_asm solves my problem.
I get no link errors from the resulting kernel, but the output is way too
small, and `nm' doesn't even recognise it -- so I'll have to solve this next.

Thanks,
Graham
--
Graham Stoney
Principal Hardware/Software Engineer
Canon Information Systems Research Australia
Ph: +61 2 9805 2909  Fax: +61 2 9805 2929

** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/