Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 6 of 8] Xen: remove run_in_exception_handler() and recode its only caller

[Keir Fraser <keir.xen@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 07/03/2011 15:56, "Tim Deegan" <Tim.Deegan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> At 15:38 +0000 on 07 Mar (1299512321), Tim Deegan wrote:
>> At 15:15 +0000 on 07 Mar (1299510944), Keir Fraser wrote:
>>> On 07/03/2011 15:05, "Keir Fraser" <keir.xen@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Like the attached patch (against latest tip).
>> 
>> Sorry, I had missed that other user.  I'll see if I can find a way to
>> make clang use the function address directly; if not, I'd be inclined to
>> have dump_execution_state have its own ID anyway, to keep %rax valid(er)
>> in BUG()s.
> 
> Turns out to be very straightforward: another level of indirection makes
> the parser happy.  If it's OK with you, I'll revert 22987:3147f2d1c6fb
> and apply this instead:

If you've successfully both build- and run-tested it with gcc then it's fine
with me. It needs testing as it's a moderately skanky construct in the first
place.

 -- Keir

> diff -r 3147f2d1c6fb xen/include/asm-x86/bug.h
> --- a/xen/include/asm-x86/bug.h Mon Mar 07 15:47:59 2011 +0000
> +++ b/xen/include/asm-x86/bug.h Mon Mar 07 15:48:32 2011 +0000
> @@ -22,7 +22,7 @@ struct bug_frame {
>      asm volatile (                                 \
>          "ud2 ; ret %0" BUG_STR(1)                  \
>          : : "i" (BUGFRAME_run_fn),                 \
> -            "i" (fn) )
> +            "i" (&(fn)) )
>  
>  #define WARN()                                     \
>      asm volatile (                                 \
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Tim.



_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel