On 04/19/2012 08:42 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>
> I don't think we can get _ASM_EXTABLE() to do that work for us, because
> we'd need to subtract symbols from two different sections. We would
> need the postprocessing tool to take care this, but guess what, we can
> do exactly that (and then, as I mentioned, just zero out the relocation
> section.)
>
Ah, apparently it is possible to generate relocations relative to the
start of the current section:
# define _ASM_EXTABLE(from,to) \
__ASM_EX_SEC ; \
_ASM_ALIGN ; \
.long (from)-__ex_table,(to)-__ex_table ; \
.previous
Then all the postprocessor would have to do is to zero out the
relocation section, and we would always just add the base of the
particular __ex_table section.
We need to make sure the module loader works, too, and not to break the
__{get,put}_user_ex macros (which would need to use a new variant of
_ASM_EXTABLE()).
There is still a disturbing number of open-coded __ex_table instances
too; those all need to be converted.
Looks like a worthwhile project but not for tonight.
All of this is for x86... other architectures would need to be converted
in whatever way is appropriate.
-hpa
