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:	Mon, 5 Oct 2009 23:55:50 +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 05:34:24PM -0400, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> Hmm, one idea hits me, how about this? :)
> - %register
> - %%spvars (%%retval, %%arg0)


The problem is that such % or %% symbols have a specific
mean in some other well known areas.

If we borrow the % from the AT&T assembly syntax style
to use register names, that we can retrieve in gcc inline
assembly, then one may expect %% to have a meaning inspired
from the same area. %% has its sense in gcc inline assembly,
but applied there, it looks confusing.

I mean, I'm trying to think like someone reading a perf probe
command line without any documentation. The more this person
can understand this command line without documentation, the better.
We know that % is used for register names, some people know that %%
is used for register names too but when we are in gcc inline assembly
with var to reg resolution and need true registers name.
Then if I try to mirror this sense from gcc to perf probe use,
I feel confused, especially in the case of %%arg1.

In this case, we should rather have %%register and %arg0 :)

Hm, %register is a clear pattern.

Somehow, %retval looks clear too, retval is verbose enough and
% is still logical as return values are most of the time (always?)
put in a register.

But %%arg0 looks confusing.


--
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ