On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 10:16 AM, Ingo Molnar <mi...@kernel.org> wrote: > > * Andy Lutomirski <l...@amacapital.net> wrote: > >> On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 10:11 AM, Ingo Molnar <mi...@kernel.org> wrote: >> > >> > * H. Peter Anvin <h...@zytor.com> wrote: >> > >> >> I like the patch set (and you can add my Acked-by:) *except* 7/7, and the >> >> reason >> >> for that is that it really isn't entry code, it is user space code. >> > >> > Well, I think arch/x86/entry/ should be a broader category for all things >> > entry >> > code: and the vsyscall code is closely related to the syscall entry/exit >> > code so >> > it's in a better place there than just being in the generic >> > arch/x86/kernel/ >> > directory. >> > >> > I kept it separate in arch/x86/entry/vsyscall/ so it doesn't mix with >> > other entry >> > code. >> >> ...and my reading comprehension is way off this morning. You already called >> it >> arch/x86/entry, so there was no reason for me to suggest that :) >> >> Anyway, arch/x86/entry/vdso isn't so bad. It's just a bit odd sounding to >> me. > > We could make it arch/x86/sys/? Sounds a bit too generic though. > > Didn't want to limit it to system calls only, because there's various other > entry > methods (irqs, traps, NMI, etc.) that we want to handle in a coherent fashion. > [ Which you are intimately aware of ;-) ] >
I'm convinced. If "entry" means entry into code provided by the kernel as opposed to entry via hardware-provided entry mechanism, then the vdso is indeed a pile of entries into the kernel. --Andy > Thanks, > > Ingo -- Andy Lutomirski AMA Capital Management, LLC -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
