On Thu, 15 Mar 2018, Radim Krèmáø wrote:
> 2018-03-15 16:19+0100, Vitaly Kuznetsov:
> > This works. But hell, this is a crude hack :-) Not sure if there's a
> > cleaner way to find what needs to be patched without something like jump
> > label table ...
> 
> Yeah, I can see us accidently patching parts of other instructions. :)
> 
> The target instruction address can be made into a C-accessible symbol
> with the same trick that vmx_return uses -- add a .global containing the
> address of a label (not sure if a more direct approach would work).
> 
> The evil in me likes it.  (The good is too lazy to add a decent patching
> infrastructure for just one user.)

Can we just use jump labels please? There is agreement that 4.17 will have
a dependency on a jump label capable compiler for x86.

Thanks,

	tglx