Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2008 18:51:25 +0100
From: Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>
To: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
       Alexander van Heukelum <heukelum@mailshack.com>,
       "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
       LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC -tip] x86: introduce ENTRY(KPROBE)_X86  assembly helpers to catch unbalanced declaration
Message-ID: <20081123175125.GA32472@uranus.ravnborg.org>
References: <20081123165711.GA12710@localhost>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20081123165711.GA12710@localhost>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1232
Lines: 36

On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 07:57:11PM +0300, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> It's usefull to catch unbalanced, missed or mixed declarations of ENTRY and
> KPROBES. These macros would help a bit (at least I hope so).
> 
> For example the following code would compile without problems
> 
>         ENTRY_X86(mcount)
>                 retq
>         END_X86(mcount)
> 
> But if you forget and mix the following form
> 
>         ENTRY_X86(mcount)
>                 retq
>         END(mcount)
> 
>         ENTRY_X86(ftrace_caller)
> 
> The assembler will issue the following message:
> Error: ENTRY_X86/KPROBE_X86 unbalanced,missed,mixed
> 
> Actually the checking is performed at every _X86 macro
> so maybe it's good idea to put ENTRY_KPROBE_FINAL_X86
> at the end of .S file to be sure you didn't miss anything.

Could we at least try this out in -next before we decide to make 
this X86 only?
I am aware that binutils can be a bit fragile but -next testing should
make a good check on this.

	Sam
--
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/