Re: [2.6 patch] x86_64: re-add a newline to RESTORE_CONTEXT

> 
> But the patch is a bugfix.  Without it, you cannot do
> 
> 	RESTORE_CONTEXT	\
> 	.globl ...	\
> 
> Was the addition of this restriction to RESTORE_CONTEXT deliberate, or
> mistaken?

RESTORE_CONTEXT is a private macro and I don't see why we should
support out of tree usages for that. As long as it works as it is 
in the tree it is fine.

-Andi
-
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: [2.6 patch] x86_64: re-add a newline to RESTORE_CONTEXT
  - From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>

References:
- [2.6 patch] x86_64: re-add a newline to RESTORE_CONTEXT
  - From: Adrian Bunk <[email protected]>
- Re: [2.6 patch] x86_64: re-add a newline to RESTORE_CONTEXT
  - From: Andi Kleen <[email protected]>
- Re: [2.6 patch] x86_64: re-add a newline to RESTORE_CONTEXT
  - From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>

Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] local_t : Documentation
Next by Date: Re: [PATCH 3/3] eCryptfs: Encrypted passthrough
Previous by thread: Re: [2.6 patch] x86_64: re-add a newline to RESTORE_CONTEXT
Next by thread: Re: [2.6 patch] x86_64: re-add a newline to RESTORE_CONTEXT
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]