From: "Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@novell.com>
To: Alexander van Heukelum <heukelum@fastmail.fm>,
Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Alexander van Heukelum <heukelum@mailshack.com>,
linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/many] PROC macro to annotate functions in assembly files
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2008 10:20:16 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <494A31F0.76E4.0078.0@novell.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1229593918.31758.1290707307@webmail.messagingengine.com>
>>> "Alexander van Heukelum" <heukelum@fastmail.fm> 18.12.08 10:51 >>>
>Agreed. I vote to complement the existing ENDPROC annotation with
>the proposed PROC annotation. Let's call that an extension, not
>something new ;). As it stands it is not impossible to go with
>ENTRY/ENDPROC for code and ENTRY/END for data. However, ENTRY
Not really: At least on ia64 these cannot be mixed (and there as well as
any other architectures that may have such requirements) replacing
ENTRY() with PROC() and END() with ENDPROC() will likely be necessary.
>implies alignment and the prefered alignment for code and data
>might differ.
Jan
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@novell.com>
To: "Alexander van Heukelum" <heukelum@fastmail.fm>,
"Sam Ravnborg" <sam@ravnborg.org>
Cc: "Ingo Molnar" <mingo@elte.hu>,
"Cyrill Gorcunov" <gorcunov@gmail.com>,
"Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"Alexander van Heukelum" <heukelum@mailshack.com>,
<linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
"LKML" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/many] PROC macro to annotate functions in assembly files
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2008 10:20:16 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <494A31F0.76E4.0078.0@novell.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1229593918.31758.1290707307@webmail.messagingengine.com>
>>> "Alexander van Heukelum" <heukelum@fastmail.fm> 18.12.08 10:51 >>>
>Agreed. I vote to complement the existing ENDPROC annotation with
>the proposed PROC annotation. Let's call that an extension, not
>something new ;). As it stands it is not impossible to go with
>ENTRY/ENDPROC for code and ENTRY/END for data. However, ENTRY
Not really: At least on ia64 these cannot be mixed (and there as well as
any other architectures that may have such requirements) replacing
ENTRY() with PROC() and END() with ENDPROC() will likely be necessary.
>implies alignment and the prefered alignment for code and data
>might differ.
Jan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-12-18 10:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-12-17 9:17 PROC macro to annotate functions in assembly files Alexander van Heukelum
2008-12-17 9:17 ` [PATCH 1/many] " Alexander van Heukelum
2008-12-17 9:17 ` [PATCH last/many] x86: checking framework for correct use of ENTRY/PROC Alexander van Heukelum
2008-12-17 11:51 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-12-17 12:04 ` Alexander van Heukelum
2008-12-17 14:43 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-12-17 17:26 ` [PATCH 1/many] PROC macro to annotate functions in assembly files Sam Ravnborg
2008-12-17 17:38 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-12-17 18:00 ` Sam Ravnborg
2008-12-17 18:33 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-12-18 9:51 ` Alexander van Heukelum
2008-12-18 10:07 ` Russell King
2008-12-18 11:30 ` Alexander van Heukelum
2008-12-18 10:20 ` Jan Beulich [this message]
2008-12-18 10:20 ` Jan Beulich
2008-12-18 12:03 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-12-18 12:40 ` Alexander van Heukelum
2008-12-18 16:05 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-12-18 9:23 ` Alexander van Heukelum
2008-12-18 12:52 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-12-17 10:53 ` David Howells
2008-12-17 11:12 ` Alexander van Heukelum
2008-12-18 11:44 ` Russell King
2008-12-18 12:35 ` Alexander van Heukelum
2008-12-18 15:53 ` Russell King
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=494A31F0.76E4.0078.0@novell.com \
--to=jbeulich@novell.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=gorcunov@gmail.com \
--cc=heukelum@fastmail.fm \
--cc=heukelum@mailshack.com \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=sam@ravnborg.org \
/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.