Em Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 09:14:06AM +0100, Ingo Molnar escreveu: > The fact that 'stacktool' already checks about assembly details like > __ex_table[] > shows that my review feedback early iterations of this series, that the > 'stacktool' name is too specific, was correct. > > We really need to rename it before it gets upstream and the situation gets > worse. > __ex_table[] has obviously nothing to do with the 'stack layout' of binaries. > > Another suitable name would be 'asmtool' or 'objtool'. For example the > following > would naturally express what it does: > > objtool check kernel/built-in.o > > the name expresses that the tool checks object files, independently of the > existing toolchain. Its primary purpose right now is the checking of stack > layout > details, but the tool is not limited to that at all.
Removing 'tool' from the tool name would be nice too :-) Making it easily googlable would be good too, lotsa people complain about 'perf' being too vague, see for a quick laugher: http://www.brendangregg.com/perf.html ``Searching for just "perf" finds sites on the police, petroleum, weed control, and a T-shirt. This is not an official perf page, for either perf_events or the T-shirt.'' The T-shirt: http://www.brendangregg.com/perf_events/omg-so-perf.jpg Maybe we should ask Linus to come with some other nice, short, searchable, funny name like 'git'? 'chob' as in 'check object'? - Arnaldo
