Re: [RFC PATCH 0/7] x86/entry: Create a home for the x86 entry code in arch/x86/entry/

Andy Lutomirski
2015-06-03T17:24:06Z

On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 10:21 AM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> * Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> wrote:
>
>>
>> * Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> wrote:
>>
>> > On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 10:11 AM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > * H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> I like the patch set (and you can add my Acked-by:) *except* 7/7, and the reason
>> > >> for that is that it really isn't entry code, it is user space code.
>> > >
>> > > Well, I think arch/x86/entry/ should be a broader category for all things entry
>> > > code: and the vsyscall code is closely related to the syscall entry/exit code so
>> > > it's in a better place there than just being in the generic arch/x86/kernel/
>> > > directory.
>> > >
>> > > I kept it separate in arch/x86/entry/vsyscall/ so it doesn't mix with other entry
>> > > code.
>> >
>> > ...and my reading comprehension is way off this morning. You already called it
>> > arch/x86/entry, so there was no reason for me to suggest that :)
>> >
>> > Anyway, arch/x86/entry/vdso isn't so bad. It's just a bit odd sounding to me.
>>
>> We could make it arch/x86/sys/? Sounds a bit too generic though.
>>
>> Didn't want to limit it to system calls only, because there's various other
>> entry methods (irqs, traps, NMI, etc.) that we want to handle in a coherent
>> fashion. [ Which you are intimately aware of ;-) ]
>
> Another tweak would be to move the kernel side entry code into
> arch/x86/entry/system/ or so, to create the following organization:
>
> arch/x86/entry: all things entry methods
>
> arch/x86/entry/system/: system/kernel mode entry code
> arch/x86/entry/vdso/: user mode entry code
> arch/x86/entry/vsyscall/: [legacy vsyscall entry code]
>
> arch/x86/entry/syscalls/: build-time syscall table generation code
>
> My primary goal is to have them all close to each other, so that we can have
> better structure, more coherency and easier overview. The names are negotiable,
> the concept is not ;-)

I think I like the approach in the patches you sent better.

Once this is in, I'll rebase my code movement change and send it,
although I probably won't call the result arch/x86/entry/entry.c :)
And then it'll be back to grumbling at context tracking.

--Andy