[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 04/16] generic-sections: add section core helpers
On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 12:06:33PM +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote: > On Wed, 24 Aug 2016 22:12:53 +0200 > "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > But: > > > > git grep SECTION_TEXT works as expected immediately. > > > > I guess its a matter of perspective. > > > > > They are also > > > the names you'll be grepping for when you look at disassembly. > > > > Sure but if you're grepping asm, you very likely know what to look for. > > After you have gone through the extra layer of naming indirection > to work out what it is. I'm still not sold on the name indirection > and hiding wildcards. Not just for asm grepping, but I don't think > it's a negative thing for devs working on the linker to know what > actual section names and commands are being used, as much as possible. OK lets see what it looks like after dropping them. Will try that. > > The idea was to add helpers to do the globbing more easily. > > > > The glob for sections now documented is SECTION_ALL() > > The glob that is range specific is SECTION_RNG_ALL() > > The glob that is linker table specific is SECTION_TBL_ALL() > > I still don't see this is better than > > .text* > .text.* > .text.range.* > .text.table.* > etc. OK will drop it. > > How about: > > > > At the top just use "Linux sections helpers" > > > > Then: > > > > /** > > * DOC: Introduction > > * > > * We document below a dedicated set of helpers used in Linux to make > > sections > > * defined in the Linux linker script accessible in C code in a generic > > form and > > * and provide certain attributes about them. > > */ > > > > > I just can't work out what exactly is a > > > "custom Linux section", and what DECLARE_LINUX_SECTION(), for example, > > > actaully > > > gives you. > > > > Its a way to replace the: > > > > extern char foo[], foo__end[]; > > > > So this provides a generalized form to use declarations used in C code to > > make > > the linker script start and end symbols from esctions accessible in C code. > > Since > > DEFINE_SECTION_RANGE() and DEFINE_LINKTABLE() macros use this, then the > > DECLARE_LINUX_SECTION() is only needed if you need access to these symbols > > in C > > code outside of the one that is defining and mainly in charge of managing > > the > > section. We provide DECLARE_*() helpers for section ranges and linker tables > > though so those can be used instead to help annotate the type of a custom > > section they are. > > Oh, that makes more sense. The SECTION stuff and custom sections was > confusing me. I would prefer just to drop all the LINUX_SECTION naming > and make it match the functionality you're using. For example: > > +DEFINE_LINKTABLE(struct jump_entry, __jump_table); > + > /* mutex to protect coming/going of the the jump_label table */ > static DEFINE_MUTEX(jump_label_mutex); > > @@ -274,8 +277,6 @@ static void __jump_label_update(struct static_key *key, > > void __init jump_label_init(void) > { > - struct jump_entry *iter_start = __start___jump_table; > - struct jump_entry *iter_stop = __stop___jump_table; > struct static_key *key = NULL; > struct jump_entry *iter; > > @@ -292,9 +293,10 @@ void __init jump_label_init(void) > return; > > jump_label_lock(); > - jump_label_sort_entries(iter_start, iter_stop); > + jump_label_sort_entries(LINUX_SECTION_START(__jump_table), > + LINUX_SECTION_END(__jump_table)); > > Now I think this is a fine abstraction to have. OK will keep this one. > I think it would look > even cleaner if you had: > > LINKTABLE_START(__jump_table) > LINKTABLE_END(__jump_table) > > Then do we need to even have the LINUX_SECTION middle man at all? Ah, thing is we use this for both linktables and section ranges. Or do we want macros for both that do the same thing ? Luis _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |