From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Kees Cook Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2021 07:27:19 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 05/10] asm-generic: Define 'funct_descr_t' to commonly describe function descriptors Message-Id: <202110130026.0AB963F82@keescook> List-Id: References: <02224551451ab9c37055499fc621c41246c81125.1633964380.git.christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu> <202110130001.11A50456@keescook> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable To: Christophe Leroy Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Paul Mackerras , Michael Ellerman , Andrew Morton , "James E.J. Bottomley" , Helge Deller , Arnd Bergmann , Greg Kroah-Hartman , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org On Wed, Oct 13, 2021 at 09:23:56AM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote: >=20 >=20 > Le 13/10/2021 =E0 09:01, Kees Cook a =E9crit=A0: > > On Mon, Oct 11, 2021 at 05:25:32PM +0200, Christophe Leroy wrote: > > > We have three architectures using function descriptors, each with its > > > own name. > > >=20 > > > Add a common typedef that can be used in generic code. > > >=20 > > > Also add a stub typedef for architecture without function descriptors, > >=20 > > nit: funct_descr_t reads weird to me. why not func_desc_t ? Either way: >=20 > func_desc_t already exists in powerpc. I have a patch to remove it as it = is > redundant with struct ppc64_opd_entry, but I didnt' want to include it in > this series. >=20 > But after all I can add it in this series, I'll add it in v2. Ah-ha! That works for me. :) Thanks! -Kees --=20 Kees Cook