From: "Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@novell.com>
To: "Alexander van Heukelum" <heukelum@mailshack.com>
Cc: "Ingo Molnar" <mingo@elte.hu>, "Andi Kleen" <andi@firstfloor.org>,
"Cyrill Gorcunov" <gorcunov@gmail.com>,
"Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"Glauber Costa" <gcosta@redhat.com>,
"Matt Mackall" <mpm@selenic.com>,
"LKML" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Nick Piggin" <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: KPROBE_ENTRY should be paired wth KPROBE_END
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 10:35:53 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <492A9199.76E4.0078.0@novell.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20081124102600.GA8335@mailshack.com>
>Right. I thought of END and ENDPROC as equivalent, so I added the change
>to this patch as a small cleanup only. But if we want this .type
>annotation, what about KPROBE_END? should it include one there too?
Yes, it always bothered me that there's no KPROBE_ENDPROC() (or
alternatively, as this being code is implied by the macro, it didn't do the
annotation by default).
>I'm getting a feeling we would be better off removing KPROBE_ENTRY and
>KPROBE_END if favour of explicitly changing sections in the .S files?
>And using the ENDPROC annotation for all procedures?
It got explicitly added a while back, so there must have been a reason to
*not* do the section adjustments explicitly. And given the current discussion
I'd also assume that more hiding of code in macros is the preferred route.
Jan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-11-24 10:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 75+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-11-16 14:29 [PATCH] trivial, entry_64: remove whitespace at end of lines Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-16 14:29 ` [RFC] x86: save_args out of line Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-17 12:14 ` Glauber Costa
2008-11-17 15:13 ` Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-17 12:53 ` Andi Kleen
2008-11-17 15:37 ` Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-17 18:23 ` Andi Kleen
2008-11-17 19:22 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-11-17 19:29 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-11-17 19:49 ` Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-17 19:54 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-11-17 19:43 ` Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-17 19:49 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-11-17 17:52 ` [RFC,v2] x86_64: " Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-18 8:09 ` Jan Beulich
2008-11-18 11:16 ` Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-18 12:51 ` Jan Beulich
2008-11-18 14:03 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-18 14:52 ` Jan Beulich
2008-11-18 15:00 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-18 22:53 ` Roland McGrath
2008-11-18 23:35 ` Andi Kleen
2008-11-18 23:36 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-11-18 23:44 ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-11-19 0:08 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-11-18 23:45 ` Roland McGrath
2008-11-19 0:06 ` Andi Kleen
2008-11-19 0:01 ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-11-19 10:34 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-19 20:09 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-19 0:18 ` [PATCH/RFC] Move entry_64.S register saving out of the macros Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-19 17:54 ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-11-19 20:16 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-20 13:40 ` [PATCH] x86: clean up after: move " Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-20 14:01 ` Andi Kleen
2008-11-20 15:04 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-20 15:26 ` Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-20 15:39 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-20 15:50 ` [PATCH] x86: clean up after: move entry_64.S register savingout " Jan Beulich
2008-11-20 15:57 ` [PATCH] x86: clean up after: move entry_64.S register saving out " Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-20 16:07 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-11-20 16:29 ` Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-20 17:24 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-21 15:41 ` [PATCH] x86: Introduce save_rest and restructure the PTREGSCALL macro in entry_64.S Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-21 15:43 ` [PATCH] x86: entry_64.S: Factor out save_paranoid and paranoid_exit Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-21 15:44 ` [PATCH] Split out some macro's and move common code to paranoid_exit Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-21 16:06 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-23 9:08 ` [PATCH] x86: include ENTRY/END in entry handlers in entry_64.S Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-23 9:15 ` [PATCH] x86: KPROBE_ENTRY should be paired wth KPROBE_END Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-23 13:27 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-23 13:51 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-11-23 14:12 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-11-23 14:55 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-23 15:04 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-11-23 15:04 ` Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-23 15:12 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-11-23 15:31 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-23 15:41 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-11-23 15:37 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-11-23 16:29 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-24 9:17 ` Jan Beulich
2008-11-24 10:26 ` Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-24 10:35 ` Jan Beulich [this message]
2008-11-24 12:24 ` [PATCH] x86_64: get rid of the use of KPROBE_ENTRY / KPROBE_END Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-24 13:33 ` Jan Beulich
2008-11-24 14:38 ` [PATCH] i386: " Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-23 9:21 ` [PATCH] x86: include ENTRY/END in entry handlers in entry_64.S Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-11-23 11:23 ` Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-23 11:35 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-11-23 20:13 ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-11-24 10:06 ` Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-24 18:07 ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-11-23 13:23 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-17 9:47 ` [PATCH] trivial, entry_64: remove whitespace at end of lines Ingo Molnar
2008-11-17 15:14 ` Alexander van Heukelum
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=492A9199.76E4.0078.0@novell.com \
--to=jbeulich@novell.com \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=gcosta@redhat.com \
--cc=gorcunov@gmail.com \
--cc=heukelum@mailshack.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=mpm@selenic.com \
--cc=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.