Re: uml and -regparm=3

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Andi Kleen
Date: Wednesday, January 9, 2008 - 7:37 pm

On Wed, Jan 09, 2008 at 09:14:04PM -0500, Jeff Dike wrote:

That's a left over from when it was called by magic inline assembly.
I suspect it would be better to switch it just over to stack args
for consistent and then declare it asmlinkage

-Andi
--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
uml and -regparm=3, Miklos Szeredi, (Wed Jan 9, 2:01 pm)
Re: uml and -regparm=3, Andi Kleen, (Wed Jan 9, 2:12 pm)
Re: uml and -regparm=3, Miklos Szeredi, (Wed Jan 9, 2:20 pm)
Re: uml and -regparm=3, Andi Kleen, (Wed Jan 9, 2:32 pm)
Re: uml and -regparm=3, Adrian Bunk, (Wed Jan 9, 2:33 pm)
Re: uml and -regparm=3, Miklos Szeredi, (Wed Jan 9, 2:50 pm)
Re: uml and -regparm=3, linux-os (Dick Johnson), (Wed Jan 9, 3:01 pm)
Re: uml and -regparm=3, Andi Kleen, (Wed Jan 9, 7:37 pm)
Re: uml and -regparm=3, H. Peter Anvin, (Wed Jan 9, 7:45 pm)
Re: uml and -regparm=3, Ingo Molnar, (Thu Jan 10, 12:32 am)
Re: uml and -regparm=3, Miklos Szeredi, (Thu Jan 10, 2:05 am)
Re: uml and -regparm=3, Ingo Molnar, (Thu Jan 10, 2:35 am)