[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140603183919.GC7664@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2014 20:39:19 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com>,
Jim Keniston <jkenisto@...ibm.com>,
Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>,
Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] uprobes/x86: Rename arch_uprobe->def into ->dflt, minor
comment updates
* Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com> wrote:
> On 06/03, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > * Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com> wrote:
> >
> > > --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/uprobes.h
> > > +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/uprobes.h
> > > @@ -52,7 +52,7 @@ struct arch_uprobe {
> > > struct {
> > > u8 fixups;
> > > u8 ilen;
> > > - } def;
> > > + } dflt;
> >
> > Pls lts nt use slly abbrvtns, ok?
>
> OK. As I said in the previous dicussion, I agree with any naming.
>
> > How about arch_uprobe->default?
>
> And this is how it was named when I wrote this code. Unfortunately gcc
> dislikes this name ;) So I renamed it to ->def. Then I was asked to
> rename it and I agree, ->def doesn't look good.
>
> Could you suggest something better?
So exactly what do those fields do? If it's scratch register handling,
would it be logical to name it arch_uprobe->scratch, or so?
Thanks,
Ingo
--
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