Received: by 2002:a25:4158:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id o85csp4019405yba; Tue, 9 Apr 2019 09:25:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzneUH6Wq+gL5oLWKykUKMx7nBcRzoVjZ91TrqNwCHbrqd76mpCipz0ythpx2ayNDGQGMDF X-Received: by 2002:a62:59cb:: with SMTP id k72mr38162767pfj.111.1554827117065; Tue, 09 Apr 2019 09:25:17 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1554827117; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=C2BSXBs8l2kozx/n8ProOQ41zh4IL3a05VRhMLm+kurIA862vt8NtiobOUD0L0igYI 3b2aQKESKvi8GgjPCwvB80FeT7ehtxLczcwhgBGUmU8oP7kJcAzZwHn9FyCT2HaV8uyu /8W1qSlrM0OiaCmUH7uTrwqjGXa7b8qUNKKxV59b+KysM31UwhHmswtx1i8MXDOoMjGs qET3nKoxCAIn/d3dOBBZjUZ0Qbpdc8mEUjbXbACipL7rr8iX+j/u0kqPXmnEJwK1J/uw oQ4dBFrLo5sg3Be/Y0eJcIWgT/XvrPme+PceDSjGNf0mqhPthuBKQdRa5zAsaucDMQCR RX8w== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc :to:from:date; bh=BoiRZT211WCdwM/isI4XZXtDsMxDswKBxdZuH7hIuaI=; b=fUXR8gIaPAxD1nQTCn73Fq1KQmNeG7YFMo+ywOQ5DKDtUAzOmLpORJzRPfb09Of4Kf 1EIccyceAZ6NGEpAQFSEro9GKCaJtBqv+vaJ1pvGiV8eza2mP0G5lLVs7PHZnSZd5ESd CMsdTNI1be4AEsl198NNrFXVCpQXKIu4QJB6EDFW+HWoNxsP0gS53cJS4aNrvRGeaNH9 hiHpVK5xARQ8Ak7XNvnGbxG8PMA7ldtpvT6LEZgE7B3n9ztayywFXqoURDxdgDR7DdhC qaIStgctvAXafEEt3FEAJBtW4p9TKWF9+uyQian2ydUbHw7NzWtJrziui5cc7FxrV3Zu 7Svg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id j12si29304724plk.144.2019.04.09.09.25.01; Tue, 09 Apr 2019 09:25:17 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726532AbfDIQY0 (ORCPT + 99 others); Tue, 9 Apr 2019 12:24:26 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:40786 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726372AbfDIQYZ (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Apr 2019 12:24:25 -0400 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.72.51.249]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E60C15AB; Tue, 9 Apr 2019 09:24:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lakrids.cambridge.arm.com (usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com [10.72.51.249]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 87FF63F68F; Tue, 9 Apr 2019 09:24:23 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2019 17:24:21 +0100 From: Mark Rutland To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Raphael Gault , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, jpoimboe@redhat.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com, will.deacon@arm.com, julien.thierry@arm.com Subject: Re: [RFC 3/6] objtool: arm64: Adapt the stack frame checks and the section analysis for the arm architecture Message-ID: <20190409162420.GB32587@lakrids.cambridge.arm.com> References: <20190409135243.12424-1-raphael.gault@arm.com> <20190409135243.12424-4-raphael.gault@arm.com> <20190409161204.GS11158@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190409161204.GS11158@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.11.1+11 (2f07cb52) (2018-12-01) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Apr 09, 2019 at 06:12:04PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > I'm just doing my initial read-through,.. however > > On Tue, Apr 09, 2019 at 02:52:40PM +0100, Raphael Gault wrote: > > + if (!(sec->sh.sh_flags & SHF_EXECINSTR) > > + && (strcmp(sec->name, ".altinstr_replacement") || !IGNORE_SHF_EXEC_FLAG)) > > continue; > > could you please not format code like that. Operators go at the end of > the line, and continuation should match the indentation of the opening > paren. So the above would look like: > > > + if (!(sec->sh.sh_flags & SHF_EXECINSTR) && > > + (strcmp(sec->name, ".altinstr_replacement") || !IGNORE_SHF_EXEC_FLAG)) > > continue; > > You appear to be doing that quit consistently, and it is against style. Raphael, as a heads-up, ./scripts/checkpatch.pl can catch issues like this. You can run it over a list of patches, so for a patch series you can run: $ ./scripts/checkpatch.pl *.patch ... and hopefully most of the output will be reasonable. Thanks, Mark.