Re: [PATCH 1/10] Cr4 is valid on some 486s

[Zachary Amsden <zach@vmware.com>]

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.  In the dynamic scenario, you need a multi-way set of 
alternatives, with the most conservative of those compiled in inline.

Zach
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/