From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from az33egw01.freescale.net (az33egw01.freescale.net [192.88.158.102]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "az33egw01.freescale.net", Issuer "Thawte Premium Server CA" (verified OK)) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9917FDE3B4 for ; Thu, 3 Jul 2008 02:38:55 +1000 (EST) Message-ID: <486BAEF4.9000904@freescale.com> Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2008 11:38:12 -0500 From: Scott Wood MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Kumar Gala Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] mpc83xx: Power Management support References: <20080625215051.GA11784@loki.buserror.net> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Kumar Gala wrote: > If we are going to allocate space for save area like this, can't we do > this in C code. Its less error prone and easier to extend over time. I > know the powermac code does something similar but it places the save > area on the stack. Then we'd have to split it between things that can be saved from C versus things that can't (gpregs, cr, lr, etc), or mess around with exposing struct offsets to asm code. I think it's just easier to do it this way. -Scott