Subject: Re: Any resolution for LKM issues?
To: <>
From: Ignatios Souvatzis <ignatios@cs.uni-bonn.de>
List: tech-kern
Date: 03/17/2001 15:42:56
--XF85m9dhOBO43t/C
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Sat, Mar 17, 2001 at 03:33:44PM +0100, Ignatios Souvatzis wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 16, 2001 at 01:49:58PM -0500, Greg Kritsch wrote:
> > Option 3: have the module loader change the relative branch instruction=
s to
> > absolute branch instructions, in place, since the entire kernel is reac=
hable
> > by an absolute branch instruction. This would be nicely efficient, too.
>=20
> Hmmmmmm :-)
>=20
> Now, this sounds like a useful idea!
One problem though: this only works for base kernel calls... inter-LKM calls
will still potentially need long branches.
-is
--=20
* Progress (n.): The process through which Usenet has evolved from
smart people in front of dumb terminals to dumb people in front of
smart terminals. -- obs@burnout.demon.co.uk (obscurity)
--XF85m9dhOBO43t/C
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.i
iQEVAgUBOrN36jCn4om+4LhpAQFE6Qf9ExArZ9ULakT3kbUwzmLcag+vcGqkZCfz
EwUGJmIhFzVNr6Jt9YDxOhcYFMFIQZtszkUw5sbi5TmF2ulrQ3LK13+AVzo45bIL
VJiqiL2NRAabeam35n3LTk//EcnLpFHJ/yluio3w0WjdfafB1bGekDLaan0LnOwT
ArHjsPW3QCgqqo2XO0BJKXgTUCr+3wXCs3H6Jj3QbO0pJbsHVrErCUNmXAWfmfIc
CT9ChYm4/0oErzg0KEahLfCMOudyumdI/PvNkorTnhb5xr+8AY/FGXGz6iS2Tv7J
UY2f1Gt1VyVCQqndZRPs2TOZsrFoLYdWL5bbu0s8iTl72w94afWQcw==
=MzDJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--XF85m9dhOBO43t/C--