[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20091005212137.GG6071@nowhere>
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 23:21:39 +0200
From: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
To: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...hat.com>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
systemtap <systemtap@...rces.redhat.com>,
DLE <dle-develop@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@...ibm.com>,
Jim Keniston <jkenisto@...ibm.com>,
"Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH tracing/kprobes v2 1/5] tracing/kprobes: Rename special
variables syntax
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@...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