[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20241116093626.GI22801@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2024 10:36:26 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>
Cc: seanjc@...gle.com, pbonzini@...hat.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
jthoughton@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 04/12] objtool: Convert instrumentation_{begin,end}()
to ANNOTATE
On Fri, Nov 15, 2024 at 10:40:08AM -0800, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 11, 2024 at 12:59:39PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > +++ b/include/linux/objtool.h
> > @@ -51,13 +51,16 @@
> > ".long 998b\n\t" \
> > ".popsection\n\t"
> >
> > -#define ASM_ANNOTATE(x) \
> > - "911:\n\t" \
> > +#define __ASM_ANNOTATE(s, x) \
> > ".pushsection .discard.annotate,\"M\",@progbits,8\n\t" \
> > - ".long 911b - .\n\t" \
> > + ".long " __stringify(s) "b - .\n\t" \
>
> It would probably be better for __ASM_ANNOTATE's callers to pass in the
> full label name (e.g. '911b') since they know where the label is? It
> could even be a named label.
I have this somewhere later, changing it here would be a pain because
the existing annotations dont do it like that.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists