From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jiri Slaby Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 05/28] x86/asm/entry: annotate THUNKs Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2019 12:38:09 +0100 Message-ID: <6b6aebb5-5f7c-e3b7-545e-3a4558e01e66@suse.cz> References: <20190130124711.12463-1-jslaby@suse.cz> <20190130124711.12463-6-jslaby@suse.cz> <20190209112551.GA5089@zn.tnic> <20190212110501.GB30028@zn.tnic> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20190212110501.GB30028@zn.tnic> Content-Language: en-GB Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Borislav Petkov Cc: mingo@redhat.com, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner , "H. Peter Anvin" , x86@kernel.org List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org On 12. 02. 19, 12:05, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 11:27:19AM +0100, Jiri Slaby wrote: >> Yes, they do not end up in the symbol table. But the macros make clear >> where is the start of the function and especially where is the end >> (something like closing bracket '}' in C). If you prefer not annotating >> local symbols, I can of course drop it from everywhere. But to me it >> looks more readable to see "here it starts" and "here it ends", still >> without generating anything to the symbol table. > > Agreed. Boundary annotation makes sense. OK, so I will switch all the *LOCAL* to .L prefix (perhaps as a separate patch prior the series/post the series)? thanks, -- js suse labs From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm1-f66.google.com ([209.85.128.66]:39403 "EHLO mail-wm1-f66.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726044AbfBLLiP (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Feb 2019 06:38:15 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 05/28] x86/asm/entry: annotate THUNKs References: <20190130124711.12463-1-jslaby@suse.cz> <20190130124711.12463-6-jslaby@suse.cz> <20190209112551.GA5089@zn.tnic> <20190212110501.GB30028@zn.tnic> From: Jiri Slaby Message-ID: <6b6aebb5-5f7c-e3b7-545e-3a4558e01e66@suse.cz> Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2019 12:38:09 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20190212110501.GB30028@zn.tnic> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-GB Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Borislav Petkov Cc: mingo@redhat.com, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner , "H. Peter Anvin" , x86@kernel.org Message-ID: <20190212113809.O2G8pucNTBBDbKiD6Fw2fAATebCpTm1tSpzOz-06i58@z> On 12. 02. 19, 12:05, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 11:27:19AM +0100, Jiri Slaby wrote: >> Yes, they do not end up in the symbol table. But the macros make clear >> where is the start of the function and especially where is the end >> (something like closing bracket '}' in C). If you prefer not annotating >> local symbols, I can of course drop it from everywhere. But to me it >> looks more readable to see "here it starts" and "here it ends", still >> without generating anything to the symbol table. > > Agreed. Boundary annotation makes sense. OK, so I will switch all the *LOCAL* to .L prefix (perhaps as a separate patch prior the series/post the series)? thanks, -- js suse labs