Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2007 14:23:37 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@redhat.com>
Cc: Harvey Harrison <harvey.harrison@gmail.com>,
       Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@in.ibm.com>,
       Jim Keniston <jkenisto@us.ibm.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
       "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: kprobes remove fix_riprel #ifdef
Message-ID: <20071230132337.GF16946@elte.hu>
References: <1198466917.6323.15.camel@brick> <47773CAD.7050907@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <47773CAD.7050907@redhat.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 929
Lines: 25


* Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@redhat.com> wrote:

> Hello Harvey,
> 
> A similar idea was already nack-ed by Ananth.
> http://sources.redhat.com/ml/systemtap/2007-q4/msg00468.html
> And I agree his thought.
> 
> Especially, "riprel" does not exist on x86_32, so fix_riprel()
> is meaningless on it.
> Thus, I think it would better be ifdef'd in call-site.

but we regularly do this in generic code: we add calls that are NOPs on 
some architectures. For example flush_cache_page() makes no sense on the 
x86 architecture. So i'm inclined to apply Harvey's cleanup - less
#ifdef complexity in higher-level code is very much favored, even
if "riprel" is a NOP concept on 32-bit.

	Ingo
--
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/