Re: [PATCH 4/12] i386: define __pa_symbol()

hi,

Sorry for the late feedback...

Vivek Goyal wrote:
> 
> On x86_64 we have to be careful with calculating the physical
> address of kernel symbols.  Both because of compiler odditities
> and because the symbols live in a different range of the virtual
> address space.
> 

[snip]

> +#define __pa_symbol(x)          \
> +	({unsigned long v;  \
> +	  asm("" : "=r" (v) : "0" (x)); \
> +	  __pa(v); })

Why not simply reusing RELOC_HIDE  like this ?

	#define __pa_symbol(x)	__pa(RELOC_HIDE(x,0))

thanks
		Franck
-
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 4/12] i386: define __pa_symbol()
  - From: Vivek Goyal <[email protected]>

References:
- [RFC][PATCH 0/12] ELF Relocatable x86 bzImage (V2)
  - From: Vivek Goyal <[email protected]>
- [PATCH 4/12] i386: define __pa_symbol()
  - From: Vivek Goyal <[email protected]>

Prev by Date: Re: debugfs oddity
Next by Date: [PATCH] RTC: build fixes
Previous by thread: [PATCH 4/12] i386: define __pa_symbol()
Next by thread: Re: [PATCH 4/12] i386: define __pa_symbol()
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[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]