Rusty Russell wrote:
> Yep, fairly clear. There was some naming queries about the
> DISABLE_INTERRUPTS vs _CLI etc, but I think they're OK.
>
The long names are pretty long, but there's only a few of them in one
file, so its not that big of a deal. I'm not keen on making them minor
variations on the real instruction names, since someone will come
through and say "hey, why _CLI? let's fix it to CLI".
>> notes-segment.patch
>>
>
> Be nice to see a user of this infrastructure, given it's fairly
> significant. Didn't someone mention PPC using something like this?
> Could we turn this into a "move infrastructure into arch-indep" patch?
>
The main reason to post it now is to see if it makes anyone's toolchain
explode. Eric was vaguely worried that older linkers might not do the
PHDR magic properly. If linkers start exploding all over the place,
I'll have to rethink this, so its better that not too much depend on it
at first.
I'm not really sure what the PPC usage of notes actually is; the code
Hollis pointed to was some program to insert ELF notes into an existing
kernel image. I don't know why they're doing that, or if being able to
generate the notes into the image directly is a useful thing to do. I
hope it is, and they can make use of this patch.
> Post those, I'd say. I think it's your turn?
>
OK, I'll do it tomorrow; need to put a few pieces together to get
patchbombing working.
J
