On Wednesday 28 June 2006 14:00, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> Hi.
>
> On Wednesday 28 June 2006 21:53, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Wednesday 28 June 2006 12:48, Nigel Cunningham wrote:
> > > I received a report of problems with CONFIG_REGPARM and suspending, that
> > > led me to recheck asm calls and declarations. Not being a guru on these
> > > things, I want to ask advice from those who know more.
> > >
> > > Along the way I noticed that current git has:
> > >
> > > extern asmlinkage int swsusp_arch_suspend(void);
> > > extern asmlinkage int swsusp_arch_resume(void);
> > >
> > > This is right for x86, but for x86_64, we actually call a C routine in
> > > arch/x86_64/kernel/suspend.c, which calls restore_image in
> > > arch/x86_64/kernel/suspend_asm.S. Restore image is declared in suspend.c
> > > as
> > >
> > > extern int restore_image(void);
> > >
> > > should it be:
> > >
> > > extern asmlinkage int restore_image(void);
> > >
> > > Having swsusp_arch_resume declared as asmlinkage doesn't matter, does it?
> >
> > No, it doesn't. It would have mattered on i386 if the function had taken
> > any arguments. AFAICT, on x86_64 it desn't matter at all.
>
> Right. But what about restore_image lacking the asmlinkage? I'm also wondering
> if that does matter.
I think asmlinkage would not matter here too (the function is x86_64-specific).
Greetings,
Rafael
-
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/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
