On Tue, 2005-11-15 at 08:04 -0800, Zachary Amsden wrote: > Gerd Knorr wrote: > > >> Yep, extending alternatives is probably better than duplicating the > >> code. Maybe having some alternative_smp() macro which places both > >> code versions into the .altinstr_replacement table? If that sounds > >> ok I'll try to come up with a experimental patch. > > > > > > i.e. something like this (as basic idea, patch is far away from doing > > anything useful ...)? > > > You still need to preserve the originals so that you can patch in both > directions. why do you insist on both directions? That still sounds like real overkill to me. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH 1/10] Cr4 is valid on some 486s
- From: Zachary Amsden <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 1/10] Cr4 is valid on some 486s
- From: Dave Jones <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 1/10] Cr4 is valid on some 486s
- References:
- [PATCH 1/10] Cr4 is valid on some 486s
- From: Zachary Amsden <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 1/10] Cr4 is valid on some 486s
- From: Pavel Machek <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 1/10] Cr4 is valid on some 486s
- From: Zachary Amsden <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 1/10] Cr4 is valid on some 486s
- From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 1/10] Cr4 is valid on some 486s
- From: Zachary Amsden <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 1/10] Cr4 is valid on some 486s
- From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 1/10] Cr4 is valid on some 486s
- From: Dave Jones <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 1/10] Cr4 is valid on some 486s
- From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 1/10] Cr4 is valid on some 486s
- From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 1/10] Cr4 is valid on some 486s
- From: Gerd Knorr <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 1/10] Cr4 is valid on some 486s
- From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 1/10] Cr4 is valid on some 486s
- From: Gerd Knorr <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 1/10] Cr4 is valid on some 486s
- From: Gerd Knorr <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 1/10] Cr4 is valid on some 486s
- From: Zachary Amsden <[email protected]>
- [PATCH 1/10] Cr4 is valid on some 486s
- Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH 1/10] Cr4 is valid on some 486s
- Next by Date: Re: [RFC][Patch 0/4] Per-task delay accounting
- Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH 1/10] Cr4 is valid on some 486s
- Next by thread: Re: [PATCH 1/10] Cr4 is valid on some 486s
- Index(es):
 |