Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1573034
| From | Hekuang <hekuang@huawei.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/2 v2] perf tools: Enable bpf prologue for arm64 |
| Date | 2017-02-03 12:20 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <t6K4i-U7-19@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | (1 earlier) <t3qbL-7cP-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <t3vXR-2l3-27@gated-at.bofh.it> <t3Hmi-16B-13@gated-at.bofh.it> <t3VIC-1CL-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <t3Y3L-2To-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
hi, 在 2017/1/27 3:31, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo 写道: > Em Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 04:52:12PM +0000, Will Deacon escreveu: >> On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 10:49:16AM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: >>> On Wed, 25 Jan 2017 13:32:01 +0000 >>> Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com> wrote: >>> >>>> On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 07:23:11AM +0000, He Kuang wrote: >>>>> Since HAVE_KPROBES can be enabled in arm64, this patch introduces >>>>> regs_query_register_offset() to convert register name to offset for >>>>> arm64, so the BPF prologue feature is ready to use. >>>>> >>>>> This patch also changes the 'dwarfnum' to 'offset' in register table, >>>>> so the related functions are consistent with x86. >>>> Wouldn't it be an awful lot simpler just to leave the code as-is, and >>>> implement regs_query_register_offset in the same way that we implement >>>> get_arch_regstr but return the dwarfnum? >>> No, since the offset is not same as dwarfnum. >>> >>> With this style, the index of array becomes the dwarfnum (the index of >>> each register defined by DWARF) and the "offset" member means the >>> byte-offset of the register in (user_)pt_regs. Those should be different. >> Ok, then do it as two patches then, rather than introduce functionality >> along with the renaming. >> >>>> I don't really see the point of all the refactoring. >>> Also, from the maintenance point of view, this rewrite work makes >>> the code simply similar to x86 implementation, that will be easier to >>> maintain :) >> Right, apart from the two howling bugs in the version that was nearly merged >> initially :p. I tend to err on the "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" side >> of the argument but if you really want the refactoring lets keep it as a >> separate change. > So, He, can you do that? How do we proceed? > > - Arnaldo I split the patch as Will suggested and resend them. Sorry for late response, just back from Spring festival.
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: [PATCH 2/2 v2] perf tools: Enable bpf prologue for arm64 Hekuang <hekuang@huawei.com> - 2017-02-03 12:20 +0100
csiph-web