[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <A2647D9D-5F13-4D78-A64D-87D22F06B713@zytor.com>
Date: Fri, 05 Jun 2015 14:09:11 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com>,
Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] Rename ia32entry.S to entry_64_compat_32.S
Call it sys if it is now only the system call entry points. Agreed with _64_compat too.
Breaking up these snarls of spaghetti assembly will be a blessing.
On June 5, 2015 6:37:14 AM PDT, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de> wrote:
>On Fri, Jun 05, 2015 at 03:00:29PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>> I'm wondering what people think about this naming scheme:
>>
>> entry_32.S # 32-bit binaries on 32-bit
>kernels
>> entry_64.S # 64-bit binaries on 64-bit
>kernels
>> entry_64_compat_32.S # 32-bit binaries on 64-bit
>kernels
>>
>> Another option would be:
>>
>> arch/x86/entry/sys_32.S
>> arch/x86/entry/sys_64.S
>> arch/x86/entry/sys_64_compat.S
>
>I like this one better because entry_64_compat_32 kinda has both
>bitness in
>there and confuses me more.
>
>Just my 2 ยข. :)
--
Sent from my mobile phone. Please pardon brevity and lack of formatting.
--
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