Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2008 20:51:16 +0100
From: Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com>,
       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: <20081123195116.GA939@uranus.ravnborg.org>
References: <20081123165711.GA12710@localhost> <20081123175125.GA32472@uranus.ravnborg.org> <20081123175846.GF12710@localhost> <20081123181248.GA338@uranus.ravnborg.org> <20081123182103.GH12710@localhost> <20081123185417.GA21106@elte.hu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20081123185417.GA21106@elte.hu>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1818
Lines: 43

On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 07:54:17PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> * Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > [Sam Ravnborg - Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 07:12:48PM +0100]
> > ...
> > | > 
> > | > I don't have -next tree on my laptop, neither cross-compile tools but
> > | > if someone could test it -- it would be great. But I used gas macros
> > | > here -- i doubt other architectures has the same syntax. At least
> > | > PDP-11 would beat us with ';' symbol :)
> > | 
> > | If we include this in any of the 100+ trees that Stephen sucks
> > | into -next we will get it tried out.
> > | 
> > | Ingo has so and so does others so getting it into -next
> > | is rather easy. Then the automated builds will tell of if
> > | it fails on any of the toolchains used there.
> > | 
> > | 	Sam
> > | 
> > 
> > Sam, to be clear, you mean that I could put this stuff into general 
> > include/linux/linkage.h with general names as ENTRY/END and the same 
> > for KPROBE so it could be merged into -next tree for testing? If 
> > yes, that as I said there will be a lot of errors so build will 
> > stuck in a moment 'cause of unbalanced ENTRY. Not sure if it's a 
> > good idea :)
> 
> neither do i think it's a particularly good idea. Lets first prototype 
> it on x86, see how it works out in practice, and then see whether it 
> can be generic. Then it can just be lifted into the generic linkage.h 
> separately, and we can then see whether it causes new problems. 

OK - I assume you guys will take action on this if we succeed in x86
with this nice build time check.

	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/