[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAM9d7cg4Apu0OhDrn2uPzRnzV24-vK=L-yR04=2eGR=n_YngTA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2024 15:17:16 -0800
From: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
To: Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>
Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>, linux-toolchains@...r.kernel.org,
linux-trace-devel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/14] perf annotate-data: Handle call instructions
On Fri, Feb 2, 2024 at 7:09 PM Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Feb 2, 2024 at 2:05 PM Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org> wrote:
> >
> > When updating instruction states, the call instruction should play a
> > role since it can change the register states. For simplicity, mark some
> > registers as scratch registers (should be arch-dependent), and
> > invalidate them all after a function call.
>
> nit: Volatile or caller-save would be a more conventional name than scratch.
'volatile' is a keyword and 'caller_saved' seems somewhat verbose.
Maybe 'temporary'?
Thanks,
Namhyung
Powered by blists - more mailing lists