On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 07:07:14PM +0100, Ralf Baechle wrote: > On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 10:28:51AM -0700, David Daney wrote: > > > Where is the handling for: > > > > case cop1_op: > > > > #ifdef CONFIG_CPU_CAVIUM_OCTEON > > case lwc2_op: /* This is bbit0 on Octeon */ > > case ldc2_op: /* This is bbit032 on Octeon */ > > case swc2_op: /* This is bbit1 on Octeon */ > > case sdc2_op: /* This is bbit132 on Octeon */ > > #endif > > > > These are all defined in insn_has_delayslot() but not here. > > Which is a wonderful demonstration for why duplicating such a large > function from branch.c was a baaad thing to do. > > Maneesh, can you refactor the code to share everything that was copied > from __compute_return_epc() can be shared with kprobes? Idealy make > everything a two part series, first one patch to refactor branch.c and > the 2nd patch to deal with kprobes. > Sure.. the branch likely instructions are not make it look good but still do it in the next version. Thanks for the comments. Regards, Maneesh
