[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <49B901B1.76E4.0078.0@novell.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 11:36:01 +0000
From: "Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@...ell.com>
To: "Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: "Alexander van Heukelum" <heukelum@...tmail.fm>,
"Andi Kleen" <andi@...stfloor.org>,
"Cyrill Gorcunov" <gorcunov@...il.com>, <tglx@...utronix.de>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86-64: add unwind annotations to
early_idt_handler
>>> Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> 12.03.09 11:53 >>>
>* Jan Beulich <jbeulich@...ell.com> wrote:
>> @@ -295,6 +297,16 @@ ENTRY(early_idt_handler)
>> testl $0x27d00,%eax
>> je 0f
>> popq %r8 # get error code
>> +
>> + CFI_STARTPROC simple
>> + CFI_SIGNAL_FRAME
>> + CFI_DEF_CFA rsp, SS+8-RIP
>> +# CFI_REL_OFFSET ss, SS-RIP
>> + CFI_REL_OFFSET rsp, RSP-RIP
>> +# CFI_REL_OFFSET rflags, EFLAGS-RIP
>> +# CFI_REL_OFFSET cs, CS-RIP
>> + CFI_REL_OFFSET rip, RIP-RIP
>> +
>
>This too is too ugly - there should be a structured macro that
>expresses this - instead of open-coded CFI details. This is a
>regular x86 entry layout with a lot of commonalities with other
>entry points.
I can certainly do that, but it'll introduce yet another patch
dependency (with the patch fixing the entry_64.S annotations), as it
would mean moving out some of the macros from entry_64.S to one
of the headers. That means I'll first have to get clarification on where
you want to go with these annotations altogether.
Jan
--
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