From: "Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@novell.com>
To: "Alexander van Heukelum" <heukelum@mailshack.com>
Cc: "Ingo Molnar" <mingo@elte.hu>, "Andi Kleen" <andi@firstfloor.org>,
"Cyrill Gorcunov" <gorcunov@gmail.com>,
"Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"Glauber Costa" <gcosta@redhat.com>,
"Matt Mackall" <mpm@selenic.com>,
"LKML" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Nick Piggin" <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: KPROBE_ENTRY should be paired wth KPROBE_END
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 10:35:53 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <492A9199.76E4.0078.0@novell.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20081124102600.GA8335@mailshack.com>
>Right. I thought of END and ENDPROC as equivalent, so I added the change
>to this patch as a small cleanup only. But if we want this .type
>annotation, what about KPROBE_END? should it include one there too?
Yes, it always bothered me that there's no KPROBE_ENDPROC() (or
alternatively, as this being code is implied by the macro, it didn't do the
annotation by default).
>I'm getting a feeling we would be better off removing KPROBE_ENTRY and
>KPROBE_END if favour of explicitly changing sections in the .S files?
>And using the ENDPROC annotation for all procedures?
It got explicitly added a while back, so there must have been a reason to
*not* do the section adjustments explicitly. And given the current discussion
I'd also assume that more hiding of code in macros is the preferred route.
Jan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-11-24 10:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 75+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-11-16 14:29 [PATCH] trivial, entry_64: remove whitespace at end of lines Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-16 14:29 ` [RFC] x86: save_args out of line Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-17 12:14 ` Glauber Costa
2008-11-17 15:13 ` Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-17 12:53 ` Andi Kleen
2008-11-17 15:37 ` Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-17 18:23 ` Andi Kleen
2008-11-17 19:22 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-11-17 19:29 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-11-17 19:49 ` Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-17 19:54 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-11-17 19:43 ` Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-17 19:49 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-11-17 17:52 ` [RFC,v2] x86_64: " Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-18 8:09 ` Jan Beulich
2008-11-18 11:16 ` Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-18 12:51 ` Jan Beulich
2008-11-18 14:03 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-18 14:52 ` Jan Beulich
2008-11-18 15:00 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-18 22:53 ` Roland McGrath
2008-11-18 23:35 ` Andi Kleen
2008-11-18 23:36 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-11-18 23:44 ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-11-19 0:08 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-11-18 23:45 ` Roland McGrath
2008-11-19 0:06 ` Andi Kleen
2008-11-19 0:01 ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-11-19 10:34 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-19 20:09 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-19 0:18 ` [PATCH/RFC] Move entry_64.S register saving out of the macros Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-19 17:54 ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-11-19 20:16 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-20 13:40 ` [PATCH] x86: clean up after: move " Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-20 14:01 ` Andi Kleen
2008-11-20 15:04 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-20 15:26 ` Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-20 15:39 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-20 15:50 ` [PATCH] x86: clean up after: move entry_64.S register savingout " Jan Beulich
2008-11-20 15:57 ` [PATCH] x86: clean up after: move entry_64.S register saving out " Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-20 16:07 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-11-20 16:29 ` Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-20 17:24 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-21 15:41 ` [PATCH] x86: Introduce save_rest and restructure the PTREGSCALL macro in entry_64.S Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-21 15:43 ` [PATCH] x86: entry_64.S: Factor out save_paranoid and paranoid_exit Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-21 15:44 ` [PATCH] Split out some macro's and move common code to paranoid_exit Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-21 16:06 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-23 9:08 ` [PATCH] x86: include ENTRY/END in entry handlers in entry_64.S Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-23 9:15 ` [PATCH] x86: KPROBE_ENTRY should be paired wth KPROBE_END Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-23 13:27 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-23 13:51 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-11-23 14:12 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-11-23 14:55 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-23 15:04 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-11-23 15:04 ` Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-23 15:12 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-11-23 15:31 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-23 15:41 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-11-23 15:37 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-11-23 16:29 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-24 9:17 ` Jan Beulich
2008-11-24 10:26 ` Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-24 10:35 ` Jan Beulich [this message]
2008-11-24 12:24 ` [PATCH] x86_64: get rid of the use of KPROBE_ENTRY / KPROBE_END Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-24 13:33 ` Jan Beulich
2008-11-24 14:38 ` [PATCH] i386: " Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-23 9:21 ` [PATCH] x86: include ENTRY/END in entry handlers in entry_64.S Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-11-23 11:23 ` Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-23 11:35 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2008-11-23 20:13 ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-11-24 10:06 ` Alexander van Heukelum
2008-11-24 18:07 ` H. Peter Anvin
2008-11-23 13:23 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-17 9:47 ` [PATCH] trivial, entry_64: remove whitespace at end of lines Ingo Molnar
2008-11-17 15:14 ` Alexander van Heukelum
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=492A9199.76E4.0078.0@novell.com \
--to=jbeulich@novell.com \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=gcosta@redhat.com \
--cc=gorcunov@gmail.com \
--cc=heukelum@mailshack.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=mpm@selenic.com \
--cc=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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).