On Mon, Aug 15, 2022 at 05:48:44PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Mon, Aug 15, 2022 at 08:35:53AM -0700, Alexei Starovoitov wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 15, 2022 at 8:28 AM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, Aug 15, 2022 at 08:17:42AM -0700, Alexei Starovoitov wrote: > > > > It's hiding a fake function from ftrace, since it's not a function > > > > and ftrace infra shouldn't show it tracing logs. > > > > In other words it's a _notrace_ function with nop5. > > > > > > Then make it a notrace function with a nop5 in it. That isn't hard. > > > > That's exactly what we're trying to do. > > All the while claiming ftrace is broken while it is not. > > > Jiri's patch is one way to achieve that. > > Fairly horrible way. > > > What is your suggestion? > > Mailed it already. > > > Move it from C to asm ? > > Would be much better than proposed IMO. nice, that would be independent of the compiler atributes and config checking.. will check on this one ;-) thanks, jirka > > > Make it naked function with explicit inline asm? > > Can be made to work but is iffy because the compiler can do horrible > things with placing the asm().
