Re: [PATCH] ftrace: unify arch_syscall_addr() implementations

From: David Miller
Date: Fri Jan 22 2010 - 20:38:34 EST

From: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2010 17:37:00 +0100

> On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 09:36:17AM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>> I would not be too sure. s390 is very strange, and I would definitely
>> want to get an Ack from the arch maintainers first.
> It's not a typo. The syscall table on s390 contains always 32 bit pointers
> since we know that the address of the function to be called is (way) below
> 4GB. So this saves us a few bytes.
> In addition this makes syscall patching done by some security modules a
> bit more difficult, since they would need to store a 64 bit pointer.
> That's because we make sure that module addresses are always above 4GB.

Sparc64 is the same way.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at