Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753124AbXJWOtH (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Oct 2007 10:49:07 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751827AbXJWOs4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Oct 2007 10:48:56 -0400 Received: from one.firstfloor.org ([213.235.205.2]:50459 "EHLO one.firstfloor.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751792AbXJWOsz (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Oct 2007 10:48:55 -0400 Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 16:48:52 +0200 From: Andi Kleen To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Andi Kleen , Jeremy Fitzhardinge , Al Viro , WANG Cong , Sam Ravnborg , Nix , Jeff Dike , Paolo Giarrusso , user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Rob Landley Subject: Re: [uml-devel] User Mode Linux still doesn't build in 2.6.23-final. Message-ID: <20071023144852.GA27956@one.firstfloor.org> References: <20071022124322.GB8181@ftp.linux.org.uk> <20071022124551.GA7438@elte.hu> <471D2ECC.6090209@goop.org> <20071022231927.GA30814@elte.hu> <471D389E.40609@goop.org> <20071023084546.GA17007@elte.hu> <20071023131009.GA32298@elte.hu> <20071023142006.GA9961@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20071023142006.GA9961@elte.hu> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1319 Lines: 35 On Tue, Oct 23, 2007 at 04:20:06PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Andi Kleen wrote: > > > >> You should rename it then to "asmcall" or something. > > > > > > if then that should be a separate renaming patch. > > > > Well you're asking for the ugly hacks for out of tree code. [...] > > nice word-bending there. I'm asking for pre-existing annotations to > survive. What I'm objecting to is that you ask for this for your out of tree code without any justification on why exactly -- -pg should in theory work with -mregparms. It's standard policy to require very good reasons for changes that are only useful for out of tree code. People get flamed for this all the time so I'm doing this thankless job here too. Is it just because you didn't want to adapt the tracer for i386 regparm? (that would be an invalid reason in my opinion ;-) The correct fix would be to adapt the tracer then. Or is it because gcc miscompiles something on i386 with -mregparm -pg? (if yes that would be a valid reason, but it should be clearly stated) -Andi - 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/