On Thu, 11 Apr 2019, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> No need to have two names for the same thing.
>
> Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <[email protected]>
This is probably worth cleaning up across the entire tree.
asm-{generic,x86,arm64,powerpc}/ptrace.h all define similar GET_IP/SET_IP
macros - although it seems that arch/riscv is the only architecture that
uses them.
- Paul
> ---
> arch/riscv/include/asm/ptrace.h | 21 ++++++---------------
> arch/riscv/kernel/stacktrace.c | 8 ++++----
> arch/riscv/kernel/traps.c | 2 +-
> 3 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/include/asm/ptrace.h b/arch/riscv/include/asm/ptrace.h
> index d35ec2f41381..9c867a4bac83 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/include/asm/ptrace.h
> +++ b/arch/riscv/include/asm/ptrace.h
> @@ -70,47 +70,38 @@ struct pt_regs {
>
>
> /* Helpers for working with the instruction pointer */
> -#define GET_IP(regs) ((regs)->sepc)
> -#define SET_IP(regs, val) (GET_IP(regs) = (val))
> -
> static inline unsigned long instruction_pointer(struct pt_regs *regs)
> {
> - return GET_IP(regs);
> + return regs->sepc;
> }
> static inline void instruction_pointer_set(struct pt_regs *regs,
> unsigned long val)
> {
> - SET_IP(regs, val);
> + regs->sepc = val;
> }
>
> #define profile_pc(regs) instruction_pointer(regs)
>
> /* Helpers for working with the user stack pointer */
> -#define GET_USP(regs) ((regs)->sp)
> -#define SET_USP(regs, val) (GET_USP(regs) = (val))
> -
> static inline unsigned long user_stack_pointer(struct pt_regs *regs)
> {
> - return GET_USP(regs);
> + return regs->sp;
> }
> static inline void user_stack_pointer_set(struct pt_regs *regs,
> unsigned long val)
> {
> - SET_USP(regs, val);
> + regs->sp = val;
> }
>
> /* Helpers for working with the frame pointer */
> -#define GET_FP(regs) ((regs)->s0)
> -#define SET_FP(regs, val) (GET_FP(regs) = (val))
> -
> static inline unsigned long frame_pointer(struct pt_regs *regs)
> {
> - return GET_FP(regs);
> + return regs->s0;
> }
> static inline void frame_pointer_set(struct pt_regs *regs,
> unsigned long val)
> {
> - SET_FP(regs, val);
> + regs->s0 = val;
> }
>
> static inline unsigned long regs_return_value(struct pt_regs *regs)
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/stacktrace.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/stacktrace.c
> index a4b1d94371a0..25fe0ff81f9e 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/stacktrace.c
> +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/stacktrace.c
> @@ -33,9 +33,9 @@ static void notrace walk_stackframe(struct task_struct *task,
> unsigned long fp, sp, pc;
>
> if (regs) {
> - fp = GET_FP(regs);
> - sp = GET_USP(regs);
> - pc = GET_IP(regs);
> + fp = frame_pointer(regs);
> + sp = user_stack_pointer(regs);
> + pc = instruction_pointer(regs);
> } else if (task == NULL || task == current) {
> const register unsigned long current_sp __asm__ ("sp");
> fp = (unsigned long)__builtin_frame_address(0);
> @@ -83,7 +83,7 @@ static void notrace walk_stackframe(struct task_struct *task,
>
> if (regs) {
> sp = GET_USP(regs);
> - pc = GET_IP(regs);
> + pc = instruction_pointer(regs);
> } else if (task == NULL || task == current) {
> const register unsigned long current_sp __asm__ ("sp");
> sp = current_sp;
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/traps.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/traps.c
> index 24a9333dda2c..86731a2fa218 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/traps.c
> +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/traps.c
> @@ -70,7 +70,7 @@ void do_trap(struct pt_regs *regs, int signo, int code,
> && printk_ratelimit()) {
> pr_info("%s[%d]: unhandled signal %d code 0x%x at 0x" REG_FMT,
> tsk->comm, task_pid_nr(tsk), signo, code, addr);
> - print_vma_addr(KERN_CONT " in ", GET_IP(regs));
> + print_vma_addr(KERN_CONT " in ", instruction_pointer(regs));
> pr_cont("\n");
> show_regs(regs);
> }
> --
> 2.20.1
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> linux-riscv mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv
>
On Thu, Apr 25, 2019 at 12:13:18PM -0700, Paul Walmsley wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 11 Apr 2019, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>
> > No need to have two names for the same thing.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <[email protected]>
>
> This is probably worth cleaning up across the entire tree.
>
> asm-{generic,x86,arm64,powerpc}/ptrace.h all define similar GET_IP/SET_IP
> macros - although it seems that arch/riscv is the only architecture that
> uses them.
Yes, we had that discussion before. I've started on a series for that,
but it is unlikely to touch riscv.
On Thu, 25 Apr 2019, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 25, 2019 at 12:13:18PM -0700, Paul Walmsley wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Thu, 11 Apr 2019, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> >
> > > No need to have two names for the same thing.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <[email protected]>
> >
> > This is probably worth cleaning up across the entire tree.
> >
> > asm-{generic,x86,arm64,powerpc}/ptrace.h all define similar GET_IP/SET_IP
> > macros - although it seems that arch/riscv is the only architecture that
> > uses them.
>
> Yes, we had that discussion before. I've started on a series for that,
> but it is unlikely to touch riscv.
OK, if you're planning to post a separate series for that across the tree,
then:
Reviewed-by: Paul Walmsley <[email protected]>
for this RISC-V patch.
- Paul