On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 11:01:24PM +0530, K.Prasad wrote:
> On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 07:23:15PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 10:47:42PM +0530, K.Prasad wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 10:54:41AM +0100, David Howells wrote:
> > > > K.Prasad wrote:
> > > >
> > >
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 07:23:15PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 10:47:42PM +0530, K.Prasad wrote:
> > On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 10:54:41AM +0100, David Howells wrote:
> > > K.Prasad wrote:
> > >
> > > > > My understanding is weak function definitions must appear in a
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 10:47:42PM +0530, K.Prasad wrote:
> On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 10:54:41AM +0100, David Howells wrote:
> > K.Prasad wrote:
> >
> > > > My understanding is weak function definitions must appear in a
> > > > different C
> > > > file than their call sites to work on some toolcha
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 10:47:42PM +0530, K.Prasad wrote:
> On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 10:54:41AM +0100, David Howells wrote:
> > K.Prasad wrote:
> >
> > > > My understanding is weak function definitions must appear in a
> > > > different C
> > > > file than their call sites to work on some toolcha
On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 10:54:41AM +0100, David Howells wrote:
> K.Prasad wrote:
>
> > > My understanding is weak function definitions must appear in a different C
> > > file than their call sites to work on some toolchains.
> > >
> >
> > Atleast, there are quite a few precedents inside the Lin
On Wed, 2010-05-26 at 10:54 +0100, David Howells wrote:
> K.Prasad wrote:
>
> > > My understanding is weak function definitions must appear in a different C
> > > file than their call sites to work on some toolchains.
> > >
> >
> > Atleast, there are quite a few precedents inside the Linux kern
K.Prasad wrote:
> > My understanding is weak function definitions must appear in a different C
> > file than their call sites to work on some toolchains.
> >
>
> Atleast, there are quite a few precedents inside the Linux kernel for
> __weak functions being invoked from the file in which they ar
On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 06:39:19AM -0500, Millton Miller wrote:
> On Tue, 25 May 2010 at 14:43:56 +0530, K.Prasad wrote:
> > Certain architectures (such as PowerPC Book III S) have a need to cleanup
> > data-structures before the breakpoint is unregistered. This patch introduces
> > an arch-specifi
On Tue, 25 May 2010 at 14:43:56 +0530, K.Prasad wrote:
> Certain architectures (such as PowerPC Book III S) have a need to cleanup
> data-structures before the breakpoint is unregistered. This patch introduces
> an arch-specific hook in release_bp_slot() along with a weak definition in
> the form o
Certain architectures (such as PowerPC Book III S) have a need to cleanup
data-structures before the breakpoint is unregistered. This patch introduces
an arch-specific hook in release_bp_slot() along with a weak definition in
the form of a stub funciton.
Signed-off-by: K.Prasad
---
kernel/hw_bre
Certain architectures (such as PowerPC Book III S) have a need to cleanup
data-structures before the breakpoint is unregistered. This patch introduces
an arch-specific hook in release_bp_slot() along with a weak definition in
the form of a stub funciton.
Signed-off-by: K.Prasad
---
kernel/hw_bre
11 matches
Mail list logo
