* H. Peter Anvin <hpa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 05/22/17 04:12, Ingo Molnar wrote: > \>> > >> This construct might be useful for other arches, which is why I called > >> it "FP" instead of "BP". But then I ruined that with the last 3 :-) > > > > Please call it BP - 'FP' can easily be read as floating-point, making it all > > super-confusing. We should use canonical x86 register names and ordering - even > > if not all registers are used straight away. > > > > Seriously, I suspect that at the end of the day we will have reinvented > DWARF. Absolutely - the main difference is: - the debug-info implementation is _internal_ to the kernel so it can be fixed instead of "oh, wait 2 years for the toolchain to fix this particular bug, work it around in the kernel meanwhile" kind of crazy flow and dependencies. I.e. the debug-info generation and parsing code is both part of the kernel Git tree and can be iterated (and fixed) at once with. - the debug-info is auto-generated for assembly as well, leaving assembly code maintainable. - the debug-info has a sane data structure designed for robustness and compactness So even if it's a subset of the existing complexity of dwarf et al we are still literally infinitely better off with this model. Thanks, Ingo -- 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
