From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754143AbaHKPNe (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Aug 2014 11:13:34 -0400 Received: from terminus.zytor.com ([198.137.202.10]:52891 "EHLO mail.zytor.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753465AbaHKPNd (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Aug 2014 11:13:33 -0400 Message-ID: <53E8DD8D.3060500@zytor.com> Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2014 08:13:17 -0700 From: "H. Peter Anvin" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jan Beulich CC: Andy Lutomirski , Kees Cook , Will Drewry , Frederic Weisbecker , Denys Vlasenko , X86 ML , Alexei Starovoitov , Denys Vlasenko , Oleg Nesterov , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] x86: entry_64.S: always allocate complete "struct pt_regs" References: <1406904498-21647-1-git-send-email-dvlasenk@redhat.com> <1406904498-21647-4-git-send-email-dvlasenk@redhat.com> <20140801231929.GB26491@localhost.localdomain> <20140811004559.GA2656@lerouge> <53E89DA3020000780002B00B@mail.emea.novell.com> <53E8C476.8000800@redhat.com> <53E8EC9F020000780002B383@mail.emea.novell.com> <53E8D905.7030809@zytor.com> <53E8F87B020000780002B41D@mail.emea.novell.com> In-Reply-To: <53E8F87B020000780002B41D@mail.emea.novell.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 08/11/2014 08:08 AM, Jan Beulich wrote: >> >> No, in *human language*. What does the DW_CFA_def_cfa_expression >> actually aim to accomplish? If you don't know the innards of the DWARF >> spec, the whole thing might as well be Hungarian. > > Just like the other DW_CFA_def_cfa_* ones it sets the current > frame address (CFA), just not via one of the pre-canned shortcuts, > but via an expression (in the case here de-referencing the stack > pointer to read the top of stack, and then adding the necessary > offset). So it indeed is similar enough to other .cfi_* annotations we > use without further comments. > Actually, what you had inside the parenteses there is actually a half-decent comment. I'm going to pretend the rest of this wasn't posted. -hpa