Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 5 Jun 2014 11:28:50 +0200 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: Re: [PATCH] uprobes/x86: Rename arch_uprobe->def into ->dflt, minor comment updates |
| |
* Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 06/04, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > > > > (2014/06/04 4:13), Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > > On 06/03, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > >> > > >> So exactly what do those fields do? If it's scratch register handling, > > >> would it be logical to name it arch_uprobe->scratch, or so? > > > > > > Not only, ->fixups encodes other flags. and ->ilen is used by UPROBE_FIX_CALL. > > > > > > arch_uprobe->def contains the arguments for default_xol_ops methods, currently > > > this handles everything except relative jmp/call insns. > > > > > > So perhaps ->dflt is not that ugly in this case? I simply do not see anything > > > better. But again, I agree with any name in advance. > > > > Hmm, how about ->defparam ? :) > > Fine with me ;) > > Ingo, will you agree with s/def/defparam/ ?
Certainly! :)
Thanks,
Ingo
| |