Re: [PATCH 31/40] trace syscalls: Convert various generic compat syscalls
On 23.6.2010 12:37, Andi Kleen wrote: It also has maintenance costs, e.g. I doubt ctags and cscope will be able to deal with these kinds of macros, so it has a high cost for everyone using these tools. FWIW, patch 16/40 of this series teaches 'make tags' to recognize these macros: http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1002103 Michal ___ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
Re: [PATCH 31/40] trace syscalls: Convert various generic compat syscalls
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 12:19:38PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: , Ian Munsie wrote: From: Ian Munsieimun...@au1.ibm.com This patch converts numerous trivial compat syscalls through the generic kernel code to use the COMPAT_SYSCALL_DEFINE family of macros. Why? This just makes the code look uglier and the functions harder to grep for. Because it makes them usable with syscall tracing. ___ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
Re: [PATCH 31/40] trace syscalls: Convert various generic compat syscalls
, Ian Munsie wrote: From: Ian Munsieimun...@au1.ibm.com This patch converts numerous trivial compat syscalls through the generic kernel code to use the COMPAT_SYSCALL_DEFINE family of macros. Why? This just makes the code look uglier and the functions harder to grep for. -Andi ___ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
Re: [PATCH 31/40] trace syscalls: Convert various generic compat syscalls
, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 12:19:38PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: , Ian Munsie wrote: From: Ian Munsieimun...@au1.ibm.com This patch converts numerous trivial compat syscalls through the generic kernel code to use the COMPAT_SYSCALL_DEFINE family of macros. Why? This just makes the code look uglier and the functions harder to grep for. Because it makes them usable with syscall tracing. Ok that information is missing in the changelog then. Also I hope the uglification-usefullness factor is really worth it. The patch is certainly no slouch on the uglification side. It also has maintenance costs, e.g. I doubt ctags and cscope will be able to deal with these kinds of macros, so it has a high cost for everyone using these tools. For those it would be actually better if you used separate annotation that does not confuse standard C parsers. -Andi ___ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
Re: [PATCH 31/40] trace syscalls: Convert various generic compat syscalls
, Ian Munsie wrote: From: Ian Munsieimun...@au1.ibm.com This patch converts numerous trivial compat syscalls through the generic kernel code to use the COMPAT_SYSCALL_DEFINE family of macros. Why? This just makes the code look uglier and the functions harder to grep for. I guess trace-syscall feature need to override COMPAT_SYSCALL_DEFINE. but It's only guess... ___ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
Re: [PATCH 31/40] trace syscalls: Convert various generic compat syscalls
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 12:37:44PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: , Frederic Weisbecker wrote: On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 12:19:38PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: , Ian Munsie wrote: From: Ian Munsieimun...@au1.ibm.com This patch converts numerous trivial compat syscalls through the generic kernel code to use the COMPAT_SYSCALL_DEFINE family of macros. Why? This just makes the code look uglier and the functions harder to grep for. Because it makes them usable with syscall tracing. Ok that information is missing in the changelog then. Agreed, the changelog lacks the purpose of what it does. Also I hope the uglification-usefullness factor is really worth it. The patch is certainly no slouch on the uglification side. It's worth because the kernel's syscall tracing is not complete, we lack all the compat part. These wrappers let us create TRACE_EVENT() for every syscalls automatically. If we had to create them manually, the uglification would be way much more worse. Most syscalls use the syscall wrappers already, so the uglification is there mostly. We just forgot to uglify a bunch of them :) It also has maintenance costs, e.g. I doubt ctags and cscope will be able to deal with these kinds of macros, so it has a high cost for everyone using these tools. For those it would be actually better if you used separate annotation that does not confuse standard C parsers. I haven't heard any complains about existing syscalls wrappers. What kind of annotations could solve that? ___ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
Re: [PATCH 31/40] trace syscalls: Convert various generic compat syscalls
I haven't heard any complains about existing syscalls wrappers. At least for me they always interrupt my grepping. What kind of annotations could solve that? If you put the annotation in a separate macro and leave the original prototype alone. Then C parsers could still parse it. -Andi ___ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
Re: [PATCH 31/40] trace syscalls: Convert various generic compat syscalls
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 02:35:38PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: I haven't heard any complains about existing syscalls wrappers. At least for me they always interrupt my grepping. What kind of annotations could solve that? If you put the annotation in a separate macro and leave the original prototype alone. Then C parsers could still parse it. I personally hate the way SYSCALL_DEFINE works with passion, mostly for the grep reason, but also because it looks horribly ugly. But there is no reason not to be consistent here. We already use the wrappers for all native system calls, so leaving the compat calls out doesn't make any sense. And I'd cheer for anyone who comes up with a better scheme for the native and compat wrappers. ___ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
Re: [PATCH 31/40] trace syscalls: Convert various generic compat syscalls
On 06/23/2010 04:38 AM, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: I haven't heard any complains about existing syscalls wrappers. Then you truly haven't been listening. -hpa -- H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf. ___ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
