From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3yck9M1SnQzDqpb for ; Thu, 16 Nov 2017 12:26:31 +1100 (AEDT) Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2017 19:26:28 -0600 From: Josh Poimboeuf To: "Naveen N. Rao" Cc: Balbir Singh , Kamalesh Babulal , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, live-patching@vger.kernel.org, Michael Ellerman Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] powerpc/modules: Don't try to restore r2 after a sibling call Message-ID: <20171116012628.6ajxlychto365sf6@treble> References: <20171114092910.20399-1-kamalesh@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20171114092910.20399-3-kamalesh@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1510654928.8xrjtkjm8m.naveen@linux.ibm.com> <20171114155323.3sjxx3eykinnl2ea@treble> <1510737417.g8rnjuztlf.naveen@linux.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 In-Reply-To: <1510737417.g8rnjuztlf.naveen@linux.ibm.com> List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 02:58:33PM +0530, Naveen N. Rao wrote: > > +int instr_is_link_branch(unsigned int instr) > > +{ > > + return (instr_is_branch_iform(instr) || instr_is_branch_bform(instr)) && > > + (instr & BRANCH_SET_LINK); > > +} > > + > > Nitpicking here, but since we're not considering the other branch forms, > perhaps this can be renamed to instr_is_link_relative_branch() (or maybe > instr_is_relative_branch_link()), just so we're clear :) My understanding is that the absolute/relative bit isn't a "form", but rather a bit that can be set for either the b-form (conditional) or the i-form (unconditional). And the above function isn't checking the absolute bit, so it isn't necessarily a relative branch. Or did I miss something? -- Josh