On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 9:27 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 08:42:23PM +0530, Rabin Vincent wrote: >> On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 1:48 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux >> <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > ftrace requires sched_clock() to be notrace. Ensure that all >> > implementations are so marked. >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Russell King <rmk+kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> >> It does seem better to have all of them explicity annotated anyway, even >> if it not required in most of the cases because they include >> <linux/sched.h> and the annotation in the declaration takes effect. > > Firstly, we shouldn't be relying upon that, and secondly, everywhere which > defines sched_clock() should already be including linux/sched.h to avoid > the sparse error. It sounds like there's also an exercise to make sure > that is the case. Yes. I believe I identified all the ones which weren't including the header in the last notrace series I sent out (versatile, plat-iop, omap, and u300 IIRC), but there's been some changes in various platforms' sched_clocks() and of course new platforms since then. > >> Note that in order for this to be fully effective, all functions called >> from sched_clock() need to be notrace too. OMAP and u300 miss this. > > Yes, OMAP still suffers from this. > > However, I assume you haven't looked at the u300 sched_clock conversion > patch which is part of a follow-on series on lakml? It sorts u300 out > in that regard. Yes, I now see U300 no longer needs the notrace addition. It still could do with the #include <linux/sched.h> addition though, which was also being done as part of that patch. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
