From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Dominik Brodowski <linux@dominikbrodowski.net>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
Brian Gerst <brgerst@gmail.com>,
Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@redhat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
x86@kernel.org, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] use struct pt_regs based syscall calling for x86-64
Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2018 19:03:16 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180406170316.ch67wtduxd6hbecp@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180406130741.GA6087@light.dominikbrodowski.net>
* Dominik Brodowski <linux@dominikbrodowski.net> wrote:
> > I.e. I'd generate the names like this:
> >
> > __{x64,x32,ia32}[_compat]_sys_waittid()
> >
> > The fully consistent nomenclature would be someting like this:
> >
> > ffffffff8105f1e0 t kernel_waitid # common C function (64-bit kargs)
> > ffffffff8105f2b0 t SYS_waitid # 64-bit uaddr args C function
> > ffffffff8105f410 T __x64_sys_waitid # 64-bit-ptregs -> C stub
> > ffffffff8105f430 T __ia32_sys_waitid # 32-bit-ptregs -> C stub
> > ffffffff8105f450 t COMPAT_SYS_waitid # 32-bit uaddr args C function
> > ffffffff8105f5e0 T __ia32_compat_sys_waitid # 32-bit-ptregs -> C stub
> > ffffffff8105f600 T __x32_compat_sys_waitid # 64-bit-ptregs -> C stub
> >
> > Looks a lot tidier and a lot more logical, doesn't it?
>
> Indeed. Want me to prepare a new patch 8/8 on top which does the renaming
> (for x86 and for the generic case), or will you do the re-naming while
> merging my patches yourself?
Please do an 8/8 patch that does the rename - I'll push out the first 7 patches so
they get more testing.
Note, I have not checked the above name space for namespace collisions - but
unless we are unlucky it should be fine.
BTW., is there any deep reason why some of these names are capitalized?
I.e. could we use:
ffffffff8105f1e0 t kernel_waitid # common C function (64-bit kargs)
ffffffff8105f2b0 t sys_waitid # 64-bit uaddr args C function
ffffffff8105f410 T __x64_sys_waitid # 64-bit-ptregs -> C stub
ffffffff8105f430 T __ia32_sys_waitid # 32-bit-ptregs -> C stub
ffffffff8105f450 t compat_sys_waitid # 32-bit uaddr args C function
ffffffff8105f5e0 T __ia32_compat_sys_waitid # 32-bit-ptregs -> C stub
ffffffff8105f600 T __x32_compat_sys_waitid # 64-bit-ptregs -> C stub
?
Note how this reduces naming complexity and increases the self-consistency even more.
Thanks,
Ingo
prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-04-06 17:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-04-05 9:52 [PATCH 0/8] use struct pt_regs based syscall calling for x86-64 Dominik Brodowski
2018-04-05 9:53 ` [PATCH 1/8] x86: don't pointlessly reload the system call number Dominik Brodowski
2018-04-06 17:09 ` [tip:x86/asm] x86/syscalls: Don't " tip-bot for Linus Torvalds
2018-04-05 9:53 ` [PATCH 2/8] syscalls: introduce CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_SYSCALL_WRAPPER Dominik Brodowski
2018-04-06 17:10 ` [tip:x86/asm] syscalls/core: Introduce CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_SYSCALL_WRAPPER=y tip-bot for Dominik Brodowski
2018-04-05 9:53 ` [PATCH 3/8] syscalls/x86: use struct pt_regs based syscall calling for 64-bit syscalls Dominik Brodowski
2018-04-06 17:11 ` [tip:x86/asm] syscalls/x86: Use 'struct pt_regs' based syscall calling convention " tip-bot for Dominik Brodowski
2018-04-05 9:53 ` [PATCH 4/8] syscalls: prepare ARCH_HAS_SYSCALL_WRAPPER for compat syscalls Dominik Brodowski
2018-04-06 17:11 ` [tip:x86/asm] syscalls/core: Prepare CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_SYSCALL_WRAPPER=y " tip-bot for Dominik Brodowski
2018-04-05 9:53 ` [PATCH 5/8] syscalls/x86: use struct pt_regs based syscall calling for IA32_EMULATION and x32 Dominik Brodowski
2018-04-06 17:12 ` [tip:x86/asm] syscalls/x86: Use 'struct pt_regs' " tip-bot for Dominik Brodowski
2018-04-05 9:53 ` [PATCH 6/8] syscalls/x86: unconditionally enable struct pt_regs based syscalls on x86_64 Dominik Brodowski
2018-04-06 17:12 ` [tip:x86/asm] syscalls/x86: Unconditionally enable 'struct pt_regs' " tip-bot for Dominik Brodowski
2018-04-05 9:53 ` [PATCH 7/8] x86/entry/64: extend register clearing on syscall entry to lower registers Dominik Brodowski
2018-04-06 17:13 ` [tip:x86/asm] syscalls/x86: Extend " tip-bot for Dominik Brodowski
2018-04-05 9:53 ` [PATCH 8/8] syscalls/x86: rename struct pt_regs-based sys_*() to __sys_x86_*() Dominik Brodowski
2018-04-05 18:35 ` kbuild test robot
2018-04-05 15:19 ` [PATCH 0/8] use struct pt_regs based syscall calling for x86-64 Ingo Molnar
2018-04-05 20:31 ` Dominik Brodowski
2018-04-06 8:23 ` Ingo Molnar
2018-04-06 8:31 ` Dominik Brodowski
2018-04-06 8:34 ` Dominik Brodowski
2018-04-06 9:20 ` Ingo Molnar
2018-04-06 9:34 ` Dominik Brodowski
2018-04-06 12:34 ` Ingo Molnar
2018-04-06 13:07 ` Dominik Brodowski
2018-04-06 17:03 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
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=20180406170316.ch67wtduxd6hbecp@gmail.com \
--to=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=brgerst@gmail.com \
--cc=dvlasenk@redhat.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@dominikbrodowski.net \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=x86@kernel.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