Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 23 Nov 2008 23:35:53 +0100 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: [RFC -tip] x86: introduce ENTRY(KPROBE)_X86 assembly helpers to catch unbalanced declaration |
| |
* Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com> wrote:
> [Ingo Molnar - Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 08:31:34PM +0100] > ... > | > > | > Just got an error in implementation -- we have to support nested > | > ENTRY without problem. Will check. What a surprise :-) > | > | do you mean: > | > | ENTRY(system_call) > | ENTRY(system_call_after_swapgs) > | ... > | END(system_call) > | > | that's more of a bug - system_call_after_swapgs is not a real entry > | point, we just need the label of it. Perhaps something like __ENTRY() > | for that case would be enough. > | > | nor is this one real: > | > | ENTRY(interrupt) > | ENTRY(irq_entries_start) > | ... > | END(irq_entries_start) > | END(interrupt) > | > | do we really need .irq_entries_start? > | > | I think in general we should define a flat hierarchy of entries. > | > | Ingo > | > > Yeah, I meant these cases. I don't think we really need > irq_entries_start (didn't find any mention of them in tree). In case > of system_call_after_swapgs I'm not that sure, but since xen use it > as a plain jmp (at least now) it could be converted to a plain > label. [...]
system_call_after_swapgs is a slowpath and should be converted to a simple:
.globl system_call_after_swapgs system_call_after_swapgs:
symbol definition - with no particular jump target alignment tweaks.
(the above sequence should be generalized as an __ENTRY() macro - i.e. raw global symbol definition without any alignment tweaks)
Ingo
| |