Re: [PATCH] uprobes/x86: Rename arch_uprobe->def into ->dflt, minor comment updates

[Oleg Nesterov]

On 06/03, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Oleg Nesterov <oleg@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > And this is how it was named when I wrote this code. Unfortunately gcc
> > dislikes this name ;) So I renamed it to ->def. Then I was asked to
> > rename it and I agree, ->def doesn't look good.
> >
> > Could you suggest something better?
>
> 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.

Oleg.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/