Re: [PATCH] x86/asm/entry/64: Merge the field offset into the THREAD_INFO() macro

[Ingo Molnar]

* Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On 03/24/2015 07:44 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > From 11e2761ba0969466299b7109eba749d2292e8796 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> > From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2015 19:18:41 +0100
> > Subject: [PATCH] x86/asm/entry/64: Merge the field offset into the THREAD_INFO() macro
> > 
> > Before:
> > 
> >    TI_sysenter_return+THREAD_INFO(%rsp,3*8),%r10d
> > 
> > After:
> > 
> >    movl    THREAD_INFO(TI_sysenter_return, %rsp, 3*8), %r10d
> > 
> > to turn it into a clear thread_info accessor.
> 
> Good idea, I also wanted to do this.
> I propose a more C-like order of arguments instead.
> In C, field names are on the right: obj.field, ptr->field.
> 
>     THREAD_INFO(%rsp, 3*8, TI_field_name)
> 
> would suggest to the reader a pseudo-C construct:
> 
>     THREAD_INFO(sp, offset)->field_name

So I picked that order, because the C code we want to emulate here 
visually is:

	thread_info->field_name

and visually this order represents just that:

	THREAD_INFO(TI_field_name, ...)

" ,%reg, offset" in that sense is just a 'detail' to how to access 
thread_info.

That order also resembles the assembly format more, which is usually 
in field(reg) order, i.e.:

	THREAD_INFO(field, %reg, ...)

Hm?

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
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/