[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4929B95E.4@zytor.com>
Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2008 12:13:18 -0800
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Alexander van Heukelum <heukelum@...lshack.com>
CC: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Jan Beulich <jbeulich@...ell.com>,
Glauber Costa <gcosta@...hat.com>,
Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: include ENTRY/END in entry handlers in entry_64.S
Alexander van Heukelum wrote:
>
> I put a ".p2align 5" in earlier in the series which caused the
> apicinterrupts to be 32-byte aligned. But it is a hack, really,
> relying on the generated code per stub to be between 17 and 32
> bytes, on the default alignment to be 16 bytes and all stubs
> to be in the .text section.
>
> I'm in favour of aligning all of the interrupt/exception stubs
> to 32 bytes, but it should be implemented the right way ;),
> which means that we need KPROBE_ENTRY_P5ALIGNED and so on :-/.
>
I'm sorry, I really don't follow that logic at all. Why the heck would
KPROBE_ENTRY_P5ALIGNED be better than .p5align?
For the record, I think we already have way to much macro crappage. It
makes the code painful to read and hard to figure out what the real
constraints on it is.
-hpa
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists