Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Andi Kleen <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>>> You should rename it then to "asmcall" or something.
>>>>
>>> if then that should be a separate renaming patch.
>>>
>> Well you're asking for the ugly hacks for out of tree code. [...]
>>
>
> nice word-bending there. I'm asking for pre-existing annotations to
> survive. It hurts you _nothing_ and it was a world of pain for us to
> recover those lost annotations. Anyway, if Jeremy does not object to the
> patch
I don't have any objections to the idea of the patch, but I'm still
concerned about the practical aspects of it. Maintaining these kinds of
annotations is hard/fragile/etc when the compiler doesn't warn when you
get it wrong, and only a very specific use-case will reveal the problem
(and do so in a fairly obscure way).
> we'll push it in and then rename fastcall to asmcall. Much ado
> about nothing.
Hm, "asmcall" is confusingly close to "asmlinkage" - and they have
exactly the same intent (can be called from asm), but with exactly the
opposite effect. How about something which actually says what we mean.
How about just "regparm"?
J
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
