From: Keith Owens <kaos@ocs.com.au>
To: kaih@khms.westfalen.de (Kai Henningsen)
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org
Subject: Re: PPC? (Was: Re: [RFC] /proc/ksyms change for IA64)
Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2001 05:41:47 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <29464.997040507@ocs3.ocs-net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: Your message of "05 Aug 2001 11:29:00 +0200." <86HgALWHw-B@khms.westfalen.de>
On 05 Aug 2001 11:29:00 +0200,
kaih@khms.westfalen.de (Kai Henningsen) wrote:
>kaos@ocs.com.au (Keith Owens) wrote on 02.08.01 in <22165.996722560@kao2.melbourne.sgi.com>:
>
>> The IA64 use of descriptors for function pointers has bitten ksymoops.
>> For those not familiar with IA64, &func points to a descriptor
>> containing { &code, &data_context }.
>
>That sounds suspiciously like what I remember from PPC. How is this solved
>on the PPC side?
Best guess, without access to a PPC box, is that it is not solved. Any
arch where function pointers go via a descriptor will have this
problem.
PPC users, does /proc/ksyms contain the address of the function code or
the address of a descriptor which points to the code? It is easy to
tell, if function entries in /proc/ksyms are close together (8-128
bytes apart) and do not match the addresses in System.map then PPC has
the same problem as IA64. If this is true, what is the layout of a PPC
function descriptor so I can handle that case as well?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-08-05 19:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-08-02 3:22 [RFC] /proc/ksyms change for IA64 Keith Owens
2001-08-05 5:44 ` Rusty Russell
2001-08-05 7:16 ` Keith Owens
2001-08-05 14:02 ` Rusty Russell
2001-08-05 14:51 ` Keith Owens
2001-08-05 9:29 ` PPC? (Was: Re: [RFC] /proc/ksyms change for IA64) Kai Henningsen
2001-08-05 19:41 ` Keith Owens [this message]
2001-08-05 20:26 ` Peter A. Castro
2001-08-06 3:05 ` Brad Boyer
2001-08-06 22:43 ` Rob Barris
2001-08-07 3:47 ` Anton Blanchard
2001-08-19 1:27 ` [RFC] /proc/ksyms change for IA64 Richard Henderson
2001-08-21 6:53 ` Keith Owens
2001-08-21 17:47 ` Richard Henderson
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=29464.997040507@ocs3.ocs-net \
--to=kaos@ocs.com.au \
--cc=kaih@khms.westfalen.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).