On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 08:36:48AM -0600, Josh Poimboeuf wrote: > Ingo made a similar suggestion a while back: > > https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20150717194307.GA26757@xxxxxxxxx > > But the frame stuff can't be folded into ENTRY/ENDPROC because we don't > need to create a stack frame for *all* functions, but rather only for > non-leaf functions. > > So then we considered something like: > > FUNCTION_ENTRY(func) > FUNCTION_RETURN(func) > > for non-leaf functions, and: > > LEAF_FUNCTION_ENTRY(func) > LEAF_FUNCTION_RETURN(func) > > for leaf functions. > > But that was too inflexible for the case where a function ends with a > jump instead of a return. Aah, there it is, thanks! It actually does ring a bell. Ok. I'm guessing the expectation is that we're not going to sprinkle those excessively but use them only in asm code. Which should be relatively seldom, especially since we're moving more and more stuff to C. Thanks. -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe live-patching" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
