From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752222AbcADSsE (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Jan 2016 13:48:04 -0500 Received: from terminus.zytor.com ([198.137.202.10]:52359 "EHLO mail.zytor.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751456AbcADSsA (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Jan 2016 13:48:00 -0500 Message-ID: <568ABE2D.9060207@zytor.com> Date: Mon, 04 Jan 2016 10:47:09 -0800 From: "H. Peter Anvin" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Luck, Tony" , Will Deacon , Ard Biesheuvel CC: "linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-s390@vger.kernel.org" , "x86@kernel.org" , "mingo@redhat.com" , "heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com" , "schwidefsky@de.ibm.com" , "mattst88@gmail.com" , "ink@jurassic.park.msu.ru" , "rth@twiddle.net" , "Yu, Fenghua" , "catalin.marinas@arm.com" , "arnd@arndb.de" , "akpm@linux-foundation.org" , "mark.rutland@arm.com" , "marc.zyngier@arm.com" Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] arm64: switch to relative exception tables References: <1451837157-447-1-git-send-email-ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org> <1451837157-447-7-git-send-email-ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org> <20160104144643.GE1616@arm.com> <568AB65A.8030901@zytor.com> <3908561D78D1C84285E8C5FCA982C28F39FA127B@ORSMSX114.amr.corp.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <3908561D78D1C84285E8C5FCA982C28F39FA127B@ORSMSX114.amr.corp.intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 01/04/2016 10:20 AM, Luck, Tony wrote: >> May I humbly ask why the [Finnish] you don't use the equivalent of the >> x86 _ASM_EXTABLE() macro? In fact, why don't we make that one generic, too? > > I'm messing with that right now (with help from Andy Lutomirski and Boris) to > add different classes of exception table (so I can tag some instructions as being > suitable for fixup from the machine check handler). So it might not be generic > for much longer. > > http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=145187079504846&w=2 > That doesn't mean it can't be overridden. -hpa