From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu (mx2.mail.elte.hu [157.181.151.9]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C101DDDDA0 for ; Tue, 10 Feb 2009 02:24:51 +1100 (EST) Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2009 16:24:24 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: Steven Rostedt Subject: Re: [PATCH] ftrace, powerpc64: fix math to calculate offset in TOC Message-ID: <20090209152424.GA9845@elte.hu> References: <20090209094014.GE7930@elte.hu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: Cc: Arnd Bergmann , LKML , linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Paul Mackerras , Remis Lima Baima List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , * Steven Rostedt wrote: > > On Mon, 9 Feb 2009, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > > * Steven Rostedt wrote: > > > > > > > > Paul, > > > > > > I found the bug that was causing large modules to fail in setting > > > up dynamic ftrace. It wound up being a simple math error. To calculate > > > the offset in the TOC, I had used an OR, but the bottom half was > > > a signed extended short, and it should have been an addition. > > > The fix is in my tree below, as well as posted here. > > > > Looks like a .29 candidate? > > Ingo, > > I think Ben pulled them into their tree. The changes are specific to ppc, > and will probably get better user testing there. Unless you feel that we > have a bit of ppc testers using tip. no, that's fine - just wanted to make sure it goes upstream via some method. Ingo