[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <49972355.3000707@zytor.com>
Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2009 12:02:29 -0800
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Alexander van Heukelum <heukelum@...tmail.fm>
CC: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Jan Beulich <jbeulich@...ell.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/6] x86 tip asm ENTRY,ENDPROC cleanup
Alexander van Heukelum wrote:
>
> Hi Peter,
>
> I see. But that would be new behaviour. I would propose to use
> completely separate macro's to handle frame-setup code generation,
> and keep ENTRY/GLOBAL/END/ENDPROC only for setting metadata and
> alignment. I think it's worth it to spell out code-generating
> macro's explicitly: there are not that many asm functions, and
> quite a few of them would need special handling. I think noone
> wants to see an ENDPROC_NOFRAMETEARDOWN ;).
>
> The common-case example would look like this.
>
> GLOBAL(c_callable_function)
> ENTER
> [asm-code]
> LEAVE
> ret
> ENDPROC(c_callable_function)
>
I guess I'm a bit concerned about people omitting them, but it's equally
concerning that people use the wrong macros, so yes, it's probably the
better thing in the long run.
-hpa
--
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf.
--
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