On 12/22/21 1:39 PM, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
Refactor PT_REGS macros definitions in bpf_tracing.h to avoid excessive duplication. We currently have classic PT_REGS_xxx() and CO-RE-enabled PT_REGS_xxx_CORE(). We are about to add also _SYSCALL variants, which would require excessive copying of all the per-architecture definitions. Instead, separate architecture-specific field/register names from the final macro that utilize them. That way for upcoming _SYSCALL variants we'll be able to just define x86_64 exception and otherwise have one common set of _SYSCALL macro definitions common for all architectures. Cc: Kenta Tada <Kenta.Tada@xxxxxxxx> Cc: Hengqi Chen <hengqi.chen@xxxxxxxxx> Cc: Björn Töpel <bjorn@xxxxxxxxxx> Cc: Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@xxxxxxxxxx>
I tried my best to compare old and new sources. Except "const volatile struct user_pt_regs *" becomes "const struct user_pt_regs *", I didn't
spot any other semantic differences. Agree that "volatile" is not really needed here. So Acked-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@xxxxxx>
