Date: Sat, 18 Jul 2015 10:40:02 -0500
From: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, Michal Marek <mmarek@suse.cz>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>, Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>,
        X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>, live-patching@vger.kernel.org,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 13/21] x86/asm/crypto: Fix frame pointer usage in
 aesni-intel_asm.S
Message-ID: <20150718154002.GA19968@treble.redhat.com>
References: <20150717203746.GB12761@treble.redhat.com>
 <CALCETrXSn=OBBdJVTE8cUVvmOv__2qMWf9UaakrjBNkEFf9TKw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20150717204438.GC12761@treble.redhat.com>
 <CALCETrWDhsV6X+G9K0KCg=3LRuKuXiiLhfZZE8Oqfd0Ng6FSzg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20150717205930.GD12761@treble.redhat.com>
 <CALCETrW8RD_6PXgtPUotVECQa1Lb9JYPPa8QW=e7hqhG9B-Jrw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20150717211019.GE12761@treble.redhat.com>
 <20150718084236.GA26430@nazgul.tnic>
 <20150718134655.GB24587@treble.redhat.com>
 <20150718142525.GA30713@nazgul.tnic>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20150718142525.GA30713@nazgul.tnic>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23.1-rc1 (2014-03-12)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 784
Lines: 20

On Sat, Jul 18, 2015 at 04:25:25PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 18, 2015 at 08:46:55AM -0500, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> > I like the balance, but the "ret" is still non-obvious.
> 
> Does it have to be obvious?

I feel that making "ret" obvious is better.

But if somebody messes up and adds a second "ret", I suppose
stackvalidate would warn about the fact that it returned without
restoring the frame pointer.  So if there are no other objections, your
suggestion of ENTRY_FRAME and ENDPROC_FRAME is fine with me.

-- 
Josh
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/