[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <26c0b59a-18b7-38cd-ed68-520ec604ccb4@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2019 18:34:07 +0200
From: Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...hat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org
Cc: Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@...il.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] x86/alternatives,jump_label: Provide better
text_poke() batching interface
Hi Peter,
On 27/08/2019 20:06, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> Adding another text_poke_bp_batch() user made me realize the interface
> is all sorts of wrong. The text poke vector should be internal to the
> implementation.
>
> This then results in a trivial interface:
>
> text_poke_queue() - which has the 'normal' text_poke_bp() interface
> text_poke_finish() - which takes no arguments and flushes any
> pending text_poke()s.
I liked the changes. My only concern is about the internal vector. I thought
about making it internal in the past, but I chose to make it "per use-case"
because there might cases in which more entries would be needed, without the
restriction of using static memory. This might be the ftrace case...
[ more in the next email ].
-- Daniel
Powered by blists - more mailing lists