Björn Töpel <bj...@kernel.org> writes:
>
> Hmm, depending on RISC-V's CMODX path, the pro/cons CALL_OPS vs dynamic
> trampolines changes quite a bit.
>
> The more I look at the pains of patching two instruction ("split
> immediates"), the better "patch data" + one insn patching look.
I was looking at how dynamic trampolines would be implemented for RISC-V.
With CALL-OPS we need to patch the auipc+jalr at function entry only, the
ops pointer above the function can be patched atomically.
With a dynamic trampoline we need a auipc+jalr pair at function entry to jump
to the trampoline and then another auipc+jalr pair to jump from trampoline to
ops->func. When the ops->func is modified, we would need to update the
auipc+jalr at in the trampoline.
So, I am not sure how to move forward here, CALL-OPS or Dynamic trampolines?
Thanks,
Puranjay
