Skip to contentSkip to conversation

Rename ia32entry.S to entry_64_compat_32.S

RFC PATCH In review Ingo Molnar 5 participants 7 messages Jun 5, 2015 – Jun 7, 2015

Subsystems (2)
x86 x86 entry code
lore
Share & tools
lore

Ingo Molnar

author
#0 lore raw

RFC PATCH 1/1 Rename ia32entry.S to entry_64_compat_32.S

I'm wondering what people think about this naming scheme:

                  entry_32.S            # 32-bit binaries on 32-bit kernels
                  entry_64.S            # 64-bit binaries on 64-bit kernels
                  entry_64_compat_32.S  # 32-bit binaries on 64-bit kernels

Another option would be:

arch/x86/entry/sys_32.S
arch/x86/entry/sys_64.S
arch/x86/entry/sys_64_compat.S

?

Thanks,

Ingo
===

Ingo Molnar (1):
x86/asm/entry/64/compat: Rename ia32entry.S -> entry_64_compat_32.S

 arch/x86/entry/Makefile                              | 2 +-
 arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S                            | 2 +-
 arch/x86/entry/{ia32entry.S => entry_64_compat_32.S} | 0
 3 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
 rename arch/x86/entry/{ia32entry.S => entry_64_compat_32.S} (100%)
Signature · 1 line
2.1.4
author
#1 lore raw

PATCH 1/1 x86/asm/entry/64/compat: Rename ia32entry.S -> entry_64_compat_32.S

So we now have the following system entry code related files, which define the following system call instruction and other entry paths:

   entry_32.S            # 32-bit binaries on 32-bit kernels
   entry_64.S            # 64-bit binaries on 64-bit kernels
   entry_64_compat_32.S  # 32-bit binaries on 64-bit kernels
Cc Alexei Starovoitov <[email protected]>
Cc Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
Cc Andy Lutomirski <[email protected]>
Cc Borislav Petkov <[email protected]>
Cc Brian Gerst <[email protected]>
Cc Denys Vlasenko <[email protected]>
Cc Frederic Weisbecker <[email protected]>
Cc H. Peter Anvin <[email protected]>
Cc Josh Triplett <[email protected]>
Cc Kees Cook <[email protected]>
Cc Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
Cc Oleg Nesterov <[email protected]>
Cc Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]>
Cc Steven Rostedt <[email protected]>
Cc Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]>
Cc Will Drewry <[email protected]>
Cc [email protected]
Signed-off-by Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
---
 arch/x86/entry/Makefile                              | 2 +-
 arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S                            | 2 +-
 arch/x86/entry/{ia32entry.S => entry_64_compat_32.S} | 0
 3 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
arch/x86/entry/Makefile +1 -1
index b93cce1c6bb2..c1e6f5406f9e 100644
@@ -6,5 +6,5 @@ obj-y				:= entry_$(BITS).o thunk_$(BITS).o syscall_$(BITS).o
 obj-y				+= vdso/
 obj-y				+= vsyscall/
 
-obj-$(CONFIG_IA32_EMULATION)	+= ia32entry.o syscall_32.o
+obj-$(CONFIG_IA32_EMULATION)	+= entry_64_compat_32.o syscall_32.o
arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S +1 -1
index 31770662b940..4cf3dd36aa0d 100644
@@ -516,7 +516,7 @@ ENTRY(ret_from_fork)
 	/*
 	 * By the time we get here, we have no idea whether our pt_regs,
 	 * ti flags, and ti status came from the 64-bit SYSCALL fast path,
-	 * the slow path, or one of the ia32entry paths.
+	 * the slow path, or one of the 32-bit compat paths.
 	 * Use IRET code path to return, since it can safely handle
 	 * all of the above.
 	 */
arch/x86/entry/entry_64_compat_32.S renamed from arch/x86/entry/ia32entry.S +0 -0
similarity index 100%
rename from arch/x86/entry/ia32entry.S
rename to arch/x86/entry/entry_64_compat_32.S
Signature · 1 line
2.1.4
#2 lore raw

Re: [PATCH] x86/asm/entry/64/compat: Rename ia32entry.S -> entry_64_compat_32.S

Quoted 7 lines · Ingo Molnar

So we now have the following system entry code related files, which define the following system call instruction and other entry paths:

   entry_32.S            # 32-bit binaries on 32-bit kernels
   entry_64.S            # 64-bit binaries on 64-bit kernels
   entry_64_compat_32.S  # 32-bit binaries on 64-bit kernels

That's too long. How about just merging it into entry_64.S? That could also allow moving some of the obscure macros from calling.h into entry_64.S where they are more visible.

--
Brian Gerst

maintainer
#3 lore raw
In reply to Ingo Molnar
Quoted 11 lines · Ingo Molnar

I'm wondering what people think about this naming scheme:

                  entry_32.S            # 32-bit binaries on 32-bit kernels
                  entry_64.S            # 64-bit binaries on 64-bit kernels
                  entry_64_compat_32.S  # 32-bit binaries on 64-bit kernels

Another option would be:

   arch/x86/entry/sys_32.S
   arch/x86/entry/sys_64.S
   arch/x86/entry/sys_64_compat.S

I like this one better because entry_64_compat_32 kinda has both bitness in there and confuses me more.

Just my 2 ¢. :)

Signature · 5 lines
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply.
--
reviewer
#4 lore raw

Call it sys if it is now only the system call entry points. Agreed with _64_compat too.

Breaking up these snarls of spaghetti assembly will be a blessing.

Quoted 21 lines · Borislav Petkov
Quoted 3 lines · Ingo Molnar

I'm wondering what people think about this naming scheme:

entry_32.S # 32-bit binaries on 32-bit

kernels

Quoted 1 line

entry_64.S # 64-bit binaries on 64-bit

kernels

Quoted 1 line
                  entry_64_compat_32.S  # 32-bit binaries on 64-bit

kernels

Quoted 6 lines

Another option would be:

   arch/x86/entry/sys_32.S
   arch/x86/entry/sys_64.S
   arch/x86/entry/sys_64_compat.S

I like this one better because entry_64_compat_32 kinda has both bitness in
there and confuses me more.

Just my 2 ¢. :)

Signature · 1 line
Sent from my mobile phone.  Please pardon brevity and lack of formatting.
#5 lore raw
Quoted 3 lines · H. Peter Anvin

Call it sys if it is now only the system call entry points. Agreed with _64_compat too.

Breaking up these snarls of spaghetti assembly will be a blessing.

I'm not too picky about what we call it or whether we merge it with entry_64.S. *However*, I think the file name should end in _64.S. The whole arch/x86 tree is arranged such that files that end in _64.S or _64.c are build for 64-bit kernels and not for 32-bit kernels. I see no reason to deviate from that.

FWIW, I'm eventually planning to completely rewrite the compat entry points to use the new (RFC patches coming in a week or two I hope!) C exit code with opportunistic sysretl at the end. I'm guessing the result will be about half the size of the current code, and it'll be comprehensible to mere mortals.

--Andy

Quoted 26 lines · Borislav Petkov
Quoted 16 lines · Ingo Molnar
Quoted 3 lines

I'm wondering what people think about this naming scheme:

entry_32.S # 32-bit binaries on 32-bit

kernels

Quoted 1 line

entry_64.S # 64-bit binaries on 64-bit

kernels

Quoted 1 line
                  entry_64_compat_32.S  # 32-bit binaries on 64-bit

kernels

Quoted 6 lines

Another option would be:

   arch/x86/entry/sys_32.S
   arch/x86/entry/sys_64.S
   arch/x86/entry/sys_64_compat.S
Quoted 5 lines

I like this one better because entry_64_compat_32 kinda has both bitness in
there and confuses me more.

Just my 2 ¢. :)

--
Sent from my mobile phone. Please pardon brevity and lack of formatting.

Signature · 2 lines
Andy Lutomirski
AMA Capital Management, LLC
author
#6 lore raw
Quoted 10 lines · Andy Lutomirski
Quoted 3 lines · H. Peter Anvin

Call it sys if it is now only the system call entry points. Agreed with _64_compat too.

Breaking up these snarls of spaghetti assembly will be a blessing.

I'm not too picky about what we call it or whether we merge it with entry_64.S. *However*, I think the file name should end in _64.S. The whole arch/x86 tree is arranged such that files that end in _64.S or _64.c are build for 64-bit kernels and not for 32-bit kernels. I see no reason to deviate from that.

Quoted 4 lines

FWIW, I'm eventually planning to completely rewrite the compat entry points to use the new (RFC patches coming in a week or two I hope!) C exit code with opportunistic sysretl at the end. I'm guessing the result will be about half the size of the current code, and it'll be comprehensible to mere mortals.

Ok, so I think the best is if I leave it alone for now: I've renamed it to entry_64_compat.S as per Boris's and hpa's suggestion, but won't merge it into entry_64.S (yet), let's see how your C conversion works out!

Thanks,

Ingo