On 11/05, David Long wrote:
On 11/04/13 14:49, Oleg Nesterov wrote:On 10/29, Oleg Nesterov wrote:Seriouly, how about the patch below?
In fact, given that you are going to reimplement set_swbp/orig_insn,
the new member is not strictly needed (afaics). But it looks more
clear this way, and we need s/MAX_UINSN_BYTES/sizeof()/ anyway.
Oleg.
---
I agree that this is cleaner than another weak callout. I have it
working for ARM now.
OK, I am going to add this patch to my tree, thanks. Can I add your
acked-by ?
Oleg.