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

[Ingo Molnar]

* Oleg Nesterov <oleg@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On 06/04, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> >
> > (2014/06/04 4:13), Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > > On 06/03, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > >>
> > >> 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.
> >
> > Hmm, how about ->defparam ? :)
> 
> Fine with me ;)
> 
> Ingo, will you agree with s/def/defparam/ ?

Certainly! :)

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/