Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 23 Nov 2008 20:51:16 +0100 | From | Sam Ravnborg <> | Subject | Re: [RFC -tip] x86: introduce ENTRY(KPROBE)_X86 assembly helpers to catch unbalanced declaration |
| |
On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 07:54:17PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com> wrote: > > > [Sam Ravnborg - Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 07:12:48PM +0100] > > ... > > | > > > | > I don't have -next tree on my laptop, neither cross-compile tools but > > | > if someone could test it -- it would be great. But I used gas macros > > | > here -- i doubt other architectures has the same syntax. At least > > | > PDP-11 would beat us with ';' symbol :) > > | > > | If we include this in any of the 100+ trees that Stephen sucks > > | into -next we will get it tried out. > > | > > | Ingo has so and so does others so getting it into -next > > | is rather easy. Then the automated builds will tell of if > > | it fails on any of the toolchains used there. > > | > > | Sam > > | > > > > Sam, to be clear, you mean that I could put this stuff into general > > include/linux/linkage.h with general names as ENTRY/END and the same > > for KPROBE so it could be merged into -next tree for testing? If > > yes, that as I said there will be a lot of errors so build will > > stuck in a moment 'cause of unbalanced ENTRY. Not sure if it's a > > good idea :) > > neither do i think it's a particularly good idea. Lets first prototype > it on x86, see how it works out in practice, and then see whether it > can be generic. Then it can just be lifted into the generic linkage.h > separately, and we can then see whether it causes new problems.
OK - I assume you guys will take action on this if we succeed in x86 with this nice build time check.
Sam
| |