On Wed, Aug 1, 2018 at 5:49 PM John David Anglin <dave.anglin@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 2018-08-01 6:18 PM, Nick Desaulniers wrote: > >> What about the uses in the fs support, etc? > > Sorry, I don't see it? > I mean _THIS_IP_. I don't understand, I'm referring to current_text_addr(). Maybe this explains more what I'm trying to do: https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/8/1/1689 If I understand your point correctly, is it that you're saying that _THIS_IP_ should be implemented in terms of inline assembly (as in what current_text_addr() is currently)? If that's what you mean and I'm understanding correctly, my point is that we should be preferring the generic C implementation as that's what's being used in most places currently, so if it was broken you'd likely already know about it. Unless unwinding is truly broken by the additional label, I don't think we need an inline assembly implementation of current_text_addr() for parisc (or any arch for that matter). If we do, then it can be localized to the parisc unwinding code, that way it can be consolidated everywhere else for every other arch. -- Thanks, ~Nick Desaulniers -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-parisc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
