Message-Id: <494A31F0.76E4.0078.0@novell.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2008 10:20:16 +0000
From: "Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@novell.com>
To: "Alexander van Heukelum" <heukelum@fastmail.fm>,
        "Sam Ravnborg" <sam@ravnborg.org>
Cc: "Ingo Molnar" <mingo@elte.hu>, "Cyrill Gorcunov" <gorcunov@gmail.com>,
        "Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        "Alexander van Heukelum" <heukelum@mailshack.com>,
        <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>, "LKML" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/many] PROC macro to annotate functions in
	 assembly files
References: <1229505475-10219-1-git-send-email-heukelum@fastmail.fm>
 <1229505475-10219-2-git-send-email-heukelum@fastmail.fm>
 <20081217172640.GB5436@uranus.ravnborg.org>
 <20081217173824.GF8078@localhost>
 <20081217180023.GA5783@uranus.ravnborg.org>
 <1229593918.31758.1290707307@webmail.messagingengine.com>
In-Reply-To: <1229593918.31758.1290707307@webmail.messagingengine.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
Content-Disposition: inline
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org

>>> "Alexander van Heukelum" <heukelum@fastmail.fm> 18.12.08 10:51 >>>
>Agreed. I vote to complement the existing ENDPROC annotation with
>the proposed PROC annotation. Let's call that an extension, not
>something new ;). As it stands it is not impossible to go with
>ENTRY/ENDPROC for code and ENTRY/END for data. However, ENTRY

Not really: At least on ia64 these cannot be mixed (and there as well as
any other architectures that may have such requirements) replacing
ENTRY() with PROC() and END() with ENDPROC() will likely be necessary.

>implies alignment and the prefered alignment for code and data
>might differ.

Jan

--
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/