On Wed, Jun 06, 2007 at 11:10:42PM +0200, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 06, 2007 at 09:47:49PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 06, 2007 at 08:29:14PM +0200, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> > > #define FUNCTION(name)   .type name, %function
> > > Introducing this simple macro in the generic ARM codebase would
> > > bring down the diff significantly
> > 
> > We have such a macro already - ENDPROC().  Recently introduced,
> > we should probably make more use of it.
> Took a short look at include/linux/linkage.h
> There is also ENTRY() that seems resonable to introduce.
> 
> And btw. if arm in any way could benefit from using @function
> it is obvious why we should not split it up. Becasue this pathset
> did only add @function for one architecture.

The advantage is purely cosmetic for non-T2 ARM - it means that objdump
knows whether to disassemble stuff as code or data, which makes its
output very much easier to read.

Since it is merely cosmetic for non-T2, I've not been in a rush to
produce patches for it, but I've no objection to applying any such
patches during a merge window.  (I do have some open coded .type's
scattered around which should also be cleaned up at the same time,
particularly the head and entry code.)
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to