Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 19/27] x86: assembly, make some functions local

2017-10-25 Thread Mark Rutland
On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 04:21:48PM +0200, Jiri Slaby wrote: > Hi, > > On 10/06/2017, 03:21 PM, Mark Rutland wrote: > > If the aim of this series is to introduce something that architectures > > use consistently, then can we please actually poke other architectures > > about it? e.g. send this to

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 19/27] x86: assembly, make some functions local

2017-10-25 Thread Jiri Slaby
Hi, On 10/06/2017, 03:21 PM, Mark Rutland wrote: > If the aim of this series is to introduce something that architectures > use consistently, then can we please actually poke other architectures > about it? e.g. send this to linux-arch, with a cover letter explaining > the idea and asking

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 19/27] x86: assembly, make some functions local

2017-10-25 Thread Jiri Slaby
On 10/06/2017, 04:01 PM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > On 6 October 2017 at 13:53, Jiri Slaby wrote: >> On 10/04/2017, 09:33 AM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: >>> In arm64, we use ENTRY/ENDPROC for functions with external linkage, >>> and the bare symbol name/ENDPROC for functions with local

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 19/27] x86: assembly, make some functions local

2017-10-06 Thread Ard Biesheuvel
On 6 October 2017 at 13:53, Jiri Slaby wrote: > Hi, > > On 10/04/2017, 09:33 AM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: >> On 4 October 2017 at 08:22, Jiri Slaby wrote: >>> On 10/02/2017, 02:48 PM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: On 2 October 2017 at 10:12, Jiri Slaby

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 19/27] x86: assembly, make some functions local

2017-10-06 Thread Mark Rutland
Hi Jiri, I can see that these serve a useful purpose (as they are necessary for asm validation encessary for livepatching), and I am not personally averse to the new annotations. However, I am concerned that as-is, this is going to create more problems for !x86 architectures. More on that below.

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 19/27] x86: assembly, make some functions local

2017-10-06 Thread Jiri Slaby
Hi, On 10/04/2017, 09:33 AM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > On 4 October 2017 at 08:22, Jiri Slaby wrote: >> On 10/02/2017, 02:48 PM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: >>> On 2 October 2017 at 10:12, Jiri Slaby wrote: There is a couple of assembly functions, which are invoked

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 19/27] x86: assembly, make some functions local

2017-10-04 Thread Ard Biesheuvel
Hello Jiri, On 4 October 2017 at 08:22, Jiri Slaby wrote: > On 10/02/2017, 02:48 PM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: >> On 2 October 2017 at 10:12, Jiri Slaby wrote: >>> There is a couple of assembly functions, which are invoked only locally >>> in the file they are

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 19/27] x86: assembly, make some functions local

2017-10-04 Thread Jiri Slaby
On 10/02/2017, 02:48 PM, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > On 2 October 2017 at 10:12, Jiri Slaby wrote: >> There is a couple of assembly functions, which are invoked only locally >> in the file they are defined. In C, we mark them "static". In assembly, >> annotate them using

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 19/27] x86: assembly, make some functions local

2017-10-02 Thread Ard Biesheuvel
On 2 October 2017 at 10:12, Jiri Slaby wrote: > There is a couple of assembly functions, which are invoked only locally > in the file they are defined. In C, we mark them "static". In assembly, > annotate them using SYM_{FUNC,CODE}_START_LOCAL (and switch their > ENDPROC to

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 19/27] x86: assembly, make some functions local

2017-10-02 Thread Jiri Slaby
There is a couple of assembly functions, which are invoked only locally in the file they are defined. In C, we mark them "static". In assembly, annotate them using SYM_{FUNC,CODE}_START_LOCAL (and switch their ENDPROC to SYM_{FUNC,CODE}_END too). Whether FUNC or CODE depends on ENDPROC/END for a