search for: __assembly__

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 411 matches for "__assembly__".

2018 Dec 16
1
[PATCH v2] x86, kbuild: revert macrofying inline assembly code
.../ #define LOCK_PREFIX_HERE "" #define LOCK_PREFIX "" diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/asm.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/asm.h index 21b0867..6467757b 100644 --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/asm.h +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/asm.h @@ -120,25 +120,12 @@ /* Exception table entry */ #ifdef __ASSEMBLY__ # define _ASM_EXTABLE_HANDLE(from, to, handler) \ - ASM_EXTABLE_HANDLE from to handler - -.macro ASM_EXTABLE_HANDLE from:req to:req handler:req - .pushsection "__ex_table","a" - .balign 4 - .long (\from) - . - .long (\to) - . - .long (\handler) - . + .pushsection "__ex_t...
2018 Dec 13
2
[PATCH] kbuild, x86: revert macros in extended asm workarounds
.../ #define LOCK_PREFIX_HERE "" #define LOCK_PREFIX "" diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/asm.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/asm.h index 21b0867..6467757b 100644 --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/asm.h +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/asm.h @@ -120,25 +120,12 @@ /* Exception table entry */ #ifdef __ASSEMBLY__ # define _ASM_EXTABLE_HANDLE(from, to, handler) \ - ASM_EXTABLE_HANDLE from to handler - -.macro ASM_EXTABLE_HANDLE from:req to:req handler:req - .pushsection "__ex_table","a" - .balign 4 - .long (\from) - . - .long (\to) - . - .long (\handler) - . + .pushsection "__ex_t...
2018 Dec 13
2
[PATCH] kbuild, x86: revert macros in extended asm workarounds
.../ #define LOCK_PREFIX_HERE "" #define LOCK_PREFIX "" diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/asm.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/asm.h index 21b0867..6467757b 100644 --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/asm.h +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/asm.h @@ -120,25 +120,12 @@ /* Exception table entry */ #ifdef __ASSEMBLY__ # define _ASM_EXTABLE_HANDLE(from, to, handler) \ - ASM_EXTABLE_HANDLE from to handler - -.macro ASM_EXTABLE_HANDLE from:req to:req handler:req - .pushsection "__ex_table","a" - .balign 4 - .long (\from) - . - .long (\to) - . - .long (\handler) - . + .pushsection "__ex_t...
2007 Jun 01
2
another RFC patch: bzImage with ELF payload
...@ setup-y += video-vga.o setup-y += video-vga.o setup-y += video-vesa.o setup-y += video-bios.o - -hostprogs-y := tools/build - -HOSTCFLAGS_build.o := $(LINUXINCLUDE) # --------------------------------------------------------------------------- @@ -65,15 +62,10 @@ AFLAGS := $(CFLAGS) -D__ASSEMBLY__ $(obj)/bzImage: IMAGE_OFFSET := 0x100000 $(obj)/bzImage: EXTRA_CFLAGS := -D__BIG_KERNEL__ $(obj)/bzImage: EXTRA_AFLAGS := $(SVGA_MODE) $(RAMDISK) -D__BIG_KERNEL__ -$(obj)/bzImage: BUILDFLAGS := -b -quiet_cmd_image = BUILD $@ -cmd_image = $(obj)/tools/build $(BUILDFLAGS) $(obj)/setup.bin \...
2007 Jun 01
2
another RFC patch: bzImage with ELF payload
...@ setup-y += video-vga.o setup-y += video-vga.o setup-y += video-vesa.o setup-y += video-bios.o - -hostprogs-y := tools/build - -HOSTCFLAGS_build.o := $(LINUXINCLUDE) # --------------------------------------------------------------------------- @@ -65,15 +62,10 @@ AFLAGS := $(CFLAGS) -D__ASSEMBLY__ $(obj)/bzImage: IMAGE_OFFSET := 0x100000 $(obj)/bzImage: EXTRA_CFLAGS := -D__BIG_KERNEL__ $(obj)/bzImage: EXTRA_AFLAGS := $(SVGA_MODE) $(RAMDISK) -D__BIG_KERNEL__ -$(obj)/bzImage: BUILDFLAGS := -b -quiet_cmd_image = BUILD $@ -cmd_image = $(obj)/tools/build $(BUILDFLAGS) $(obj)/setup.bin \...
2007 May 31
1
[patch rfc wip] first cut of ELF bzImage
...@ setup-y += video-vga.o setup-y += video-vga.o setup-y += video-vesa.o setup-y += video-bios.o - -hostprogs-y := tools/build - -HOSTCFLAGS_build.o := $(LINUXINCLUDE) # --------------------------------------------------------------------------- @@ -65,15 +62,10 @@ AFLAGS := $(CFLAGS) -D__ASSEMBLY__ $(obj)/bzImage: IMAGE_OFFSET := 0x100000 $(obj)/bzImage: EXTRA_CFLAGS := -D__BIG_KERNEL__ $(obj)/bzImage: EXTRA_AFLAGS := $(SVGA_MODE) $(RAMDISK) -D__BIG_KERNEL__ -$(obj)/bzImage: BUILDFLAGS := -b -quiet_cmd_image = BUILD $@ -cmd_image = $(obj)/tools/build $(BUILDFLAGS) $(obj)/setup.bin \...
2007 May 31
1
[patch rfc wip] first cut of ELF bzImage
...@ setup-y += video-vga.o setup-y += video-vga.o setup-y += video-vesa.o setup-y += video-bios.o - -hostprogs-y := tools/build - -HOSTCFLAGS_build.o := $(LINUXINCLUDE) # --------------------------------------------------------------------------- @@ -65,15 +62,10 @@ AFLAGS := $(CFLAGS) -D__ASSEMBLY__ $(obj)/bzImage: IMAGE_OFFSET := 0x100000 $(obj)/bzImage: EXTRA_CFLAGS := -D__BIG_KERNEL__ $(obj)/bzImage: EXTRA_AFLAGS := $(SVGA_MODE) $(RAMDISK) -D__BIG_KERNEL__ -$(obj)/bzImage: BUILDFLAGS := -b -quiet_cmd_image = BUILD $@ -cmd_image = $(obj)/tools/build $(BUILDFLAGS) $(obj)/setup.bin \...
2017 Oct 04
0
[PATCH 05/13] x86/paravirt: Move paravirt asm macros to paravirt-asm.h
...ch/x86/include/asm/paravirt-asm.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/paravirt-asm.h new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..add8a190fdac --- /dev/null +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/paravirt-asm.h @@ -0,0 +1,126 @@ +#ifndef _ASM_X86_PARAVIRT_ASM_H +#define _ASM_X86_PARAVIRT_ASM_H + +#ifdef CONFIG_PARAVIRT +#ifdef __ASSEMBLY__ + +#include <asm/asm.h> +#include <asm/paravirt_types.h> + +#define _PVSITE(ptype, clobbers, ops, word, algn) \ +771:; \ + ops; \ +772:; \ + .pushsection .parainstructions,"a"; \ + .align algn; \ + word 771b; \ + .byte ptype; \ + .byte 772b-771b; \...
2007 Oct 31
3
[PATCH 0/7] (Re-)introducing pvops for x86_64 - Consolidation part
Hi folks, Here is the result of the latest work on the pvops front, after the x86 arch merge. From the functionality point of view, almost nothing was changed, except for proper vsmp support - which was discussed, but not implemented before - and the introduction of smp_ops in x86_64, which eased the merging of the smp header. Speaking of the merge, a significant part (although not majority) of
2007 Oct 31
3
[PATCH 0/7] (Re-)introducing pvops for x86_64 - Consolidation part
Hi folks, Here is the result of the latest work on the pvops front, after the x86 arch merge. From the functionality point of view, almost nothing was changed, except for proper vsmp support - which was discussed, but not implemented before - and the introduction of smp_ops in x86_64, which eased the merging of the smp header. Speaking of the merge, a significant part (although not majority) of
2020 Jul 10
0
[PATCH v3 06/19] asm/rwonce: Don't pull <asm/barrier.h> into 'asm-generic/rwonce.h'
...changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/vdso/gettimeofday.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/vdso/gettimeofday.h index 36dc18553ed8..1b207cf07697 100644 --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/vdso/gettimeofday.h +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/vdso/gettimeofday.h @@ -7,6 +7,7 @@ #ifndef __ASSEMBLY__ +#include <asm/barrier.h> #include <asm/errno.h> #include <asm/unistd.h> #include <asm/vdso/cp15.h> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/vdso/compat_gettimeofday.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/vdso/compat_gettimeofday.h index b6907ae78e53..bcf7649999a4 100644 --- a/arch/arm6...
2020 Jul 10
1
[PATCH v3 06/19] asm/rwonce: Don't pull <asm/barrier.h> into 'asm-generic/rwonce.h'
...(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/vdso/gettimeofday.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/vdso/gettimeofday.h > index 36dc18553ed8..1b207cf07697 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/vdso/gettimeofday.h > +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/vdso/gettimeofday.h > @@ -7,6 +7,7 @@ > > #ifndef __ASSEMBLY__ > > +#include <asm/barrier.h> > #include <asm/errno.h> > #include <asm/unistd.h> > #include <asm/vdso/cp15.h> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/vdso/compat_gettimeofday.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/vdso/compat_gettimeofday.h > index b6907ae78e53..bc...
2007 Apr 18
2
[PATCH 5/6] i386 virtualization - Make generic set wrprotect a macro
On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 04:00:39PM -0700, zach@vmware.com wrote: > Make the generic version of ptep_set_wrprotect a macro. This is good for > code uniformity, and fixes the build for architectures which include pgtable.h > through headers into assembly code, but do not define a ptep_set_wrprotect > function. This against the kernel coding style. In fact, we are usually doing
2007 Apr 18
2
[PATCH 5/6] i386 virtualization - Make generic set wrprotect a macro
On Mon, Aug 15, 2005 at 04:00:39PM -0700, zach@vmware.com wrote: > Make the generic version of ptep_set_wrprotect a macro. This is good for > code uniformity, and fixes the build for architectures which include pgtable.h > through headers into assembly code, but do not define a ptep_set_wrprotect > function. This against the kernel coding style. In fact, we are usually doing
2007 Jun 06
7
[PATCH RFC 0/7] proposed updates to boot protocol and paravirt booting
This series: 1. Updates the boot protocol to version 2.07 2. Clean up the existing build process, to get rid of tools/build and make the linker do more heavy lifting 3. Make the bzImage payload an ELF file. The bootloader can extract this as a naked ELF file by skipping over boot_params.setup_sects worth of 16-bit setup code. 4. Update the boot_params to 2.07, and update the
2007 Jun 06
7
[PATCH RFC 0/7] proposed updates to boot protocol and paravirt booting
This series: 1. Updates the boot protocol to version 2.07 2. Clean up the existing build process, to get rid of tools/build and make the linker do more heavy lifting 3. Make the bzImage payload an ELF file. The bootloader can extract this as a naked ELF file by skipping over boot_params.setup_sects worth of 16-bit setup code. 4. Update the boot_params to 2.07, and update the
2007 Dec 06
51
[PATCH 0/19] desc_struct integration
Hi, this is a series of patches that unify the struct desc_struct and friends across x86_64 and i386. As usual, it provides paravirt capabilities as a side-effect for x86_64. I consider the main goal, namely, of unifying the desc_struct, an ongoing effort, being this the beginning. A lot of old code has to be touched to accomplish that. I don't consider this patch ready for inclusion.
2007 Dec 06
51
[PATCH 0/19] desc_struct integration
Hi, this is a series of patches that unify the struct desc_struct and friends across x86_64 and i386. As usual, it provides paravirt capabilities as a side-effect for x86_64. I consider the main goal, namely, of unifying the desc_struct, an ongoing effort, being this the beginning. A lot of old code has to be touched to accomplish that. I don't consider this patch ready for inclusion.
2019 May 08
2
[PATCH 04/10] s390/mm: force swiotlb for protected virtualization
...sm/mem_encrypt.h new file mode 100644 > index 000000000000..0898c09a888c > --- /dev/null > +++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h > @@ -0,0 +1,18 @@ > +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */ > +#ifndef S390_MEM_ENCRYPT_H__ > +#define S390_MEM_ENCRYPT_H__ > + > +#ifndef __ASSEMBLY__ > + > +#define sme_me_mask 0ULL This is rather ugly, but I understand why it's there > + > +static inline bool sme_active(void) { return false; } > +extern bool sev_active(void); > + > +int set_memory_encrypted(unsigned long addr, int numpages); > +int set_memory_decry...
2019 May 08
2
[PATCH 04/10] s390/mm: force swiotlb for protected virtualization
...sm/mem_encrypt.h new file mode 100644 > index 000000000000..0898c09a888c > --- /dev/null > +++ b/arch/s390/include/asm/mem_encrypt.h > @@ -0,0 +1,18 @@ > +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */ > +#ifndef S390_MEM_ENCRYPT_H__ > +#define S390_MEM_ENCRYPT_H__ > + > +#ifndef __ASSEMBLY__ > + > +#define sme_me_mask 0ULL This is rather ugly, but I understand why it's there > + > +static inline bool sme_active(void) { return false; } > +extern bool sev_active(void); > + > +int set_memory_encrypted(unsigned long addr, int numpages); > +int set_memory_decry...