lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Jun]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: 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


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-06-05 12:21    [W:0.051 / U:0.352 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site