linux-kernel - Re: [uml-devel] User Mode Linux still doesn't build in 2.6.23-final.

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 23 Oct 2007 16:47:10 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
Cc:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, Al Viro <viro@....linux.org.uk>,
	WANG Cong <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
	Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>, Nix <nix@...eri.org.uk>,
	Jeff Dike <jdike@...toit.com>,
	Paolo Giarrusso <p.giarrusso@...il.com>,
	user-mode-linux-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net>
Subject: Re: [uml-devel] User Mode Linux still doesn't build in 2.6.23-final.


* Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org> wrote:

> Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > * Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org> wrote:
> >
> >   
> >>>> You should rename it then to "asmcall" or something.
> >>>>         
> >>> if then that should be a separate renaming patch.
> >>>       
> >> Well you're asking for the ugly hacks for out of tree code.  [...]
> >>     
> >
> > nice word-bending there. I'm asking for pre-existing annotations to 
> > survive. It hurts you _nothing_ and it was a world of pain for us to 
> > recover those lost annotations. Anyway, if Jeremy does not object to the 
> > patch
> 
> I don't have any objections to the idea of the patch, but I'm still 
> concerned about the practical aspects of it.  Maintaining these kinds 
> of annotations is hard/fragile/etc when the compiler doesn't warn when 
> you get it wrong, and only a very specific use-case will reveal the 
> problem (and do so in a fairly obscure way).

it wont be any different from the situation before - we had no such 
warnings there either. Anyway, this shouldnt really bother you as at the 
moment it's only used for -rt. The issue is to keep something we had 
before (but which was stupidly/carelessly removed). If it breaks we'll 
fix it up.

> > we'll push it in and then rename fastcall to asmcall. Much ado about 
> > nothing.
> 
> Hm, "asmcall" is confusingly close to "asmlinkage" - and they have 
> exactly the same intent (can be called from asm), but with exactly the 
> opposite effect.  How about something which actually says what we 
> mean. How about just "regparm"?

yeah, regparm is fine.

	Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/