On Wed, 9 Jul 2025 10:10:30 -0400
Mathieu Desnoyers [off-list ref] wrote:
Indeed it's only kernel internal API, but this is API that will be
expected by each architecture supporting unwind_user. Changing
this later on will cause a lot of friction and cross-architecture churn
compared to doing it right in the first place.
The changes you are suggesting is added info if an architecture needs
it. That is easy to do. All you need is to add an extra field in the
state structure and the architectures that need it can use it, and the
rest can ignore it.
Again, I'm not worried about it. If you want to send me a patch, feel
free, but I'm not doing this extra work, until I see a real problem.
-- Steve.