Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | From | Josh Poimboeuf <> | Subject | [PATCH 3/3] x86/asm: Don't use the confusing '.ifeq' directive | Date | Fri, 20 Oct 2017 11:21:35 -0500 |
| |
I find the '.ifeq <expression>' directive to be confusing. Reading it quickly seems to suggest its opposite meaning, or that it's missing an argument.
Improve readability by replacing all of its x86 uses with '.if <expression> == 0'.
Signed-off-by: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com> --- arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S | 2 +- arch/x86/kernel/head_32.S | 2 +- arch/x86/kernel/head_64.S | 2 +- 3 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S b/arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S index f6cdb7a1455e..846e84a1d1f7 100644 --- a/arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S +++ b/arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S @@ -817,7 +817,7 @@ ENTRY(\sym) ASM_CLAC - .ifeq \has_error_code + .if \has_error_code == 0 pushq $-1 /* ORIG_RAX: no syscall to restart */ .endif diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/head_32.S b/arch/x86/kernel/head_32.S index 9ed3074d0d27..6e50f87765e5 100644 --- a/arch/x86/kernel/head_32.S +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/head_32.S @@ -401,7 +401,7 @@ ENTRY(early_idt_handler_array) # 24(%rsp) error code i = 0 .rept NUM_EXCEPTION_VECTORS - .ifeq (EXCEPTION_ERRCODE_MASK >> i) & 1 + .if ((EXCEPTION_ERRCODE_MASK >> i) & 1) == 0 pushl $0 # Dummy error code, to make stack frame uniform .endif pushl $i # 20(%esp) Vector number diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/head_64.S b/arch/x86/kernel/head_64.S index 99b1262c8a81..48875910607d 100644 --- a/arch/x86/kernel/head_64.S +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/head_64.S @@ -274,7 +274,7 @@ ENDPROC(start_cpu0) ENTRY(early_idt_handler_array) i = 0 .rept NUM_EXCEPTION_VECTORS - .ifeq (EXCEPTION_ERRCODE_MASK >> i) & 1 + .if ((EXCEPTION_ERRCODE_MASK >> i) & 1) == 0 UNWIND_HINT_IRET_REGS pushq $0 # Dummy error code, to make stack frame uniform .else -- 2.13.6
| |