On Sun, Jan 29, 2017 at 2:54 AM, Jinbum Park wrote:
> This patch makes arch-independent testcases for RODATA.
> Both x86 and x86_64 already have testcases for RODATA,
> But they are arch-specific because using inline assembly directly.
>
> and cacheflush.h is not suitable location for rodata-test
This patch makes arch-independent testcases for RODATA.
Both x86 and x86_64 already have testcases for RODATA,
But they are arch-specific because using inline assembly directly.
and cacheflush.h is not suitable location for rodata-test related things.
Since they were in cacheflush.h,
If someone ch
On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 11:18:33PM +0900, Jinbum Park wrote:
> + /* test 2: write to the variable; this should fault */
> + /*
> + * This must be written in assembly to be able to catch the
> + * exception that is supposed to happen in the correct case.
> + *
> + * So th
This patch makes arch-independent testcases for RODATA.
Both x86 and x86_64 already have testcases for RODATA,
But they are arch-specific because using inline assembly directly.
and cacheflush.h is not suitable location for rodata-test related things.
Since they were in cacheflush.h,
If someone ch
This patch makes arch-independent testcases for RODATA.
Both x86 and x86_64 already have testcases for RODATA,
But they are arch-specific because using inline assembly directly.
and cacheflush.h is not suitable location for rodata-test related things.
Since they were in cacheflush.h,
If someone ch
5 matches
Mail list logo