From: labbott@redhat.com (Laura Abbott)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] arm64: dump: Make ptdump debugfs a separate option
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2016 18:11:44 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <cf3b51d5-f5ad-9fc3-7bea-7e7a5a9798c5@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160930004852.GC4369@remoulade>
On 09/29/2016 05:48 PM, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 05:31:09PM -0700, Laura Abbott wrote:
>> On 09/29/2016 05:13 PM, Mark Rutland wrote:
>>> On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 02:32:55PM -0700, Laura Abbott wrote:
>>>> +int ptdump_register(struct ptdump_info *info, const char *name)
>>>> +{
>>>> + ptdump_initialize(info);
>>>> + return ptdump_debugfs_create(info, name);
>>>> }
>>>
>>> It feels like a layering violation to have the core ptdump code call the
>>> debugfs ptdump code. Is there some reason this has to live here?
>>
>> Which 'this' are you referring to here? Are you suggesting moving
>> the ptdump_register elsewhere or moving the debugfs create elsewhere?
>
> Sorry, I should have worded that better.
>
> I meant moving ptdump_register into ptdump_debugfs.c, perhaps renamed to make it
> clear it's debugfs-specific.
>
> We could instead update existing users to call ptdump_debugfs_create()
> directly, and have that call ptdump_initialize(), which could itself become a
> staic inline in a header.
Ah okay, I see what you are suggesting. ptdump_initialize should still
happen regardless of debugfs status though so I guess
ptdump_debugfs_create would just get turned into just ptdump_initialize
which seems a little unclear. I'll come up with some other shed
colors^W^Wfunction names.
Thanks,
Laura
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-09-30 1:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-09-29 21:32 [PATCH 0/3] WX Checking for arm64 Laura Abbott
2016-09-29 21:32 ` [PATCH 1/3] arm64: dump: Make ptdump debugfs a separate option Laura Abbott
2016-09-30 0:13 ` Mark Rutland
2016-09-30 0:31 ` Laura Abbott
2016-09-30 0:48 ` Mark Rutland
2016-09-30 1:11 ` Laura Abbott [this message]
2016-09-30 1:27 ` Mark Rutland
2016-09-29 21:32 ` [PATCH 2/3] arm64: dump: Make the page table dumping seq_file optional Laura Abbott
2016-09-30 0:36 ` Mark Rutland
2016-09-29 21:32 ` [PATCH 3/3] arm64: dump: Add checking for writable and exectuable pages Laura Abbott
2016-09-30 2:08 ` Mark Rutland
2016-09-30 15:58 ` Mark Rutland
2016-09-30 16:25 ` Kees Cook
2016-09-30 16:41 ` Mark Rutland
2016-09-30 17:16 ` Kees Cook
2016-09-30 1:29 ` [kernel-hardening] [PATCH 0/3] WX Checking for arm64 Kees Cook
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=cf3b51d5-f5ad-9fc3-7bea-7e7a5a9798c5@redhat.com \
--to=labbott@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).