Hi, On Mon, 2009-11-02 at 22:43 +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: [...] > > > > -static inline u64 mips_timecounter_read(void) > > > > +static inline u64 notrace mips_timecounter_read(void) > > > > > > > > > You don't need to set notrace functions, unless their addresses > > > are referenced somewhere, which unfortunately might happen > > > for some functions but this is rare. > > > > > > > Okay, Will remove it. > > > > Oops, a word has escaped from my above sentence. I wanted to say: > > "You don't need to set notrace to inline functions" :) > > Thanks ;) I have got your meaning at that time, and have removed them with inline functions. > > > But I would rather see a __mips_notrace on these two core functions. > > > > What about this: __arch_notrace? If the arch need this, define it, > > otherwise, ignore it! if only graph tracer need it, define it in "#ifdef > > CONFIG_FUNCTION_GRAPH_TRACER ... #endif". > > The problem is that archs may want to disable tracing on different > places. > For example mips wants to disable tracing in timecounter_read_delta, > but another arch may want to disable tracing somewhere else. > > We'll then have several unrelated __arch_notrace. One that is relevant > for mips, another that is relevant for arch_foo, but all of them will > apply for all arch that have defined a __arch_notrace. > > It's true that __mips_notrace is not very elegant as it looks like > a specific arch annotation intruder. > > But at least that gives us a per arch filter granularity. > > If only static ftrace could disappear, we could keep only dynamic > ftrace and we would then be able to filter dynamically. > But I'm not sure it's a good idea for archs integration. > Got it. Thanks & Regards, Wu Zhangjin
