2010/8/7 Jakub Kiciński <kubakici@xxxxx>
Dnia 07-08-2010 o 21:32:49 Parmenides <mobile.parmenides@xxxxxxxxx> napisał(a):
asmlinage void IRQ3;yes, we get it exactly. But, asm(...) is just a statement and in my
asm(...);
opinion, it should belong to some function body.
but if the asm were inside a function body, it would contradict
the asmlinkage function *declaration* in the previous line !
functions have C linkage, but reduce to labels, which are just addresses.
the label is probably defined in the asm(), and linker knows how to call it,
with asmlinkage.
GCC allow to declare asms outside functions. In this case asm statement (which is _outside_ any function) is preceded by function declaration. Later in the asm macro places a label having the same name as the function declared above. This is function definition. Actually AFAIK from the linker point of view functions are just labels placed somewhere in the code.While the first line
merely declare a function without definition owing to the semicolon
behind IRQ3.
I'm just a noob so I'm probably wrong here, but using BUILD_IRQ(0x01) should produce something like:
asmlinkage void IRQ0x01_interrupt(void);
__asm__(
"\n"__ALIGN_STR"\n" <- some alignment will replace this
"IRQ0x01_interrupt:\n\t" <- label == function
"pushl $"0x01"-256\n\t"
"jmp common_interrupt");
Yes, that looks right to me.
