[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAMj1kXHQ3YjNNrZE_rS5qYgCoOqXHmPy=q_Ncp-iYmcFfZG50w@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 9 Nov 2021 20:03:52 +0100
From:   Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
        Jason Baron <jbaron@...mai.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 6/7] static_call: rename EXPORT_ macros to be more self-explanatory
On Tue, 9 Nov 2021 at 20:00, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 09, 2021 at 05:45:48PM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> > So let's rename these macros to
> >
> >   EXPORT_STATIC_CALL        -> EXPORT_STATIC_CALL_FOR_UPDATE
> >   EXPORT_STATIC_CALL_TRAMP  -> EXPORT_STATIC_CALL
> >
>
> Ok, let's pain this shed a bit.
>
> How about:
>
>         EXPORT_STATIC_CALL_RW
>         EXPORT_STATIC_CALL_RO
>
Works for me
> respectively. OR.. alternatively, have both:
>
>         EXPORT_STATIC_CALL_KEY
>         EXPORT_STATIC_CALL_TRAMP
>
> and those that want to export both get to use both.
Yeah but whether a trampoline even exists is an implementation detail,
which I would like to omit from the API.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists