From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: nicolas.pitre@linaro.org (Nicolas Pitre) Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2011 19:57:13 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [RFC PATCH v2 1/5] ARM: mm: Add generic proc/arch struct definition macros In-Reply-To: <1308049105-16080-2-git-send-email-dave.martin@linaro.org> References: <1308049105-16080-1-git-send-email-dave.martin@linaro.org> <1308049105-16080-2-git-send-email-dave.martin@linaro.org> Message-ID: To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Tue, 14 Jun 2011, Dave Martin wrote: > This patch adds some generic macros to reduce boilerplate when > declaring certain common structures in arch/arm/mm/*.S > > Thanks to Russell King for outlining what the > define_processor_functions macro could look like. > > Signed-off-by: Dave Martin > --- > arch/arm/mm/proc-macros.S | 79 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 files changed, 79 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mm/proc-macros.S b/arch/arm/mm/proc-macros.S > index 34261f9..3c5ffbb 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/mm/proc-macros.S > +++ b/arch/arm/mm/proc-macros.S > @@ -254,3 +255,81 @@ > mcr p15, 0, r0, c7, c10, 1 @ clean L1 D line > mcr p15, 0, ip, c7, c10, 4 @ data write barrier > .endm > + > +.macro define_processor_functions name:req, dabort:req, pabort:req, nommu=0, suspend=0 > + .pushsection .text > + > + __INITDATA Was this __INITDATA right after a .pushsection intentional? One might be confused about the effective section after this. The __INITDATA tag is actually doing a .section ".init.data","aw",%progbits Maybe this could be used as argument to .pushsection instead of .text (which in this case should probably have been .rodata otherwise anyway). Nicolas