Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754849AbZJEVVw (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Oct 2009 17:21:52 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754216AbZJEVVw (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Oct 2009 17:21:52 -0400 Received: from mail-ew0-f225.google.com ([209.85.219.225]:41119 "EHLO mail-ew0-f225.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753821AbZJEVVv (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Oct 2009 17:21:51 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; b=pqY1CxKXfrXyHrVV5WgRXY+UrXgenQzmuQjGbHPY5mrjc/pIcDm4YO10H2NGw6qWfN vSW4AfrZnwCLH2r3NmSPNs6vjPYaBjiuzdzwxph9zEuKiqpWhC8zgaBYjhZU01l5uUfb OGvIQCu6dAbMwlTXN9AOFcE2ZT91K6lDvUX7U= Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 23:21:39 +0200 From: Frederic Weisbecker To: Masami Hiramatsu Cc: Steven Rostedt , Ingo Molnar , lkml , systemtap , DLE , Thomas Gleixner , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Mike Galbraith , Paul Mackerras , Peter Zijlstra , Christoph Hellwig , Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli , Jim Keniston , "Frank Ch. Eigler" Subject: Re: [PATCH tracing/kprobes v2 1/5] tracing/kprobes: Rename special variables syntax Message-ID: <20091005212137.GG6071@nowhere> References: <20091002214834.30906.86502.stgit@dhcp-100-2-132.bos.redhat.com> <20091002214842.30906.49220.stgit@dhcp-100-2-132.bos.redhat.com> <20091003015444.GE4828@nowhere> <4AC830F0.2010003@redhat.com> <20091005191829.GA6071@nowhere> <4ACA549F.9010300@redhat.com> <20091005205826.GE6071@nowhere> <4ACA60E9.30404@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4ACA60E9.30404@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 817 Lines: 22 On Mon, Oct 05, 2009 at 05:11:05PM -0400, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > Frederic Weisbecker wrote: >> Hmm, the problem is that %1, %2, etc. is not very self-explainable. >> >> May be %arg1, %arg2, etc.. But would that sound confusing since we >> have % for registers? > > As I sent right now, how about %argumentN ? it will not conflict with > register names... > There are archs that have %arg0 %arg1, ... as register names? Well, arg(n) looks shorter but I won't personnally mind if we eventually chose %argumentN. It's also clear, self-explainable and it won't collide. -- 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/