Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751576AbdLAV77 (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Dec 2017 16:59:59 -0500 Received: from mail-pl0-f41.google.com ([209.85.160.41]:37183 "EHLO mail-pl0-f41.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751089AbdLAV7z (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Dec 2017 16:59:55 -0500 X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMZfScJr0aTXKyFoyV+52PF46TXTKQuhT0SpY09LZ8VEreymXO3evTXVJvhfF5z1elcId4Ph+A== Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) Subject: Re: [PATCH 16/21] x86/entry/64: Use a per-CPU trampoline stack for IDT entries From: Andy Lutomirski X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (15B202) In-Reply-To: <5b74d67c-8253-8585-c8c0-9e61e3f119b2@linux.intel.com> Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2017 13:59:52 -0800 Cc: Andy Lutomirski , Ingo Molnar , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Thomas Gleixner , "H . Peter Anvin" , Peter Zijlstra , Borislav Petkov , Linus Torvalds Message-Id: <33B5761C-F997-4994-8DD7-D38AF0777FE6@amacapital.net> References: <20171127104529.12435-1-mingo@kernel.org> <20171127104529.12435-17-mingo@kernel.org> <305ed448-6f8e-eecd-d120-546efc185443@linux.intel.com> <5b74d67c-8253-8585-c8c0-9e61e3f119b2@linux.intel.com> To: Dave Hansen Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by nfs id vB1M0429008693 Content-Length: 811 Lines: 20 On Dec 1, 2017, at 1:21 PM, Dave Hansen wrote: >>>> [ 30.811750] CR2: fffffffffdeb2f98 CR3: 0000000423fae001 CR4: 00000000001607e0 >>>> [ 30.819712] Call Trace: >>>> [ 30.822442] >>>> [ 30.825170] trace_hardirqs_on_thunk+0x1c/0x1c >>> ... >>>> [ 31.000571] R13: 0000000000000050 R14: 0000000000000076 R15: 00007f59f76f2d60 >>>> [ 31.008533] >>> >>> Should we change that string to something more descriptive? >> >> I suppose we could rename it to "ENTRY_TRAMPOLINE" or something like that. > > The attached patch does just that. Any objections? > I think that, if we do this, we should rename it in the code, too. Calling it one thing in the oops and something else in the code is just going to add confusion.