On Thu, 21 Apr 2022 04:26:39 +0000 "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> +TRACE_EVENT(ifs_status, > >> + > >> + TP_PROTO(union ifs_scan activate, union ifs_status status), > > > > Really, you want to pass the structure in by value, so that we have two > > copies? One to get to this function and then one to write to the ring > > buffer? > > These "structures" are just bitfield helpers for a u64 that is passed into > WRMSR (in the case of activate) and received back from RDMSR in > the case of status. > > So this is really just a pair of u64 arguments, with the compiler handling > the bit field extractions into the ring buffer. I was just wondering if passing by reference would be better, but as you stated, they are just two u64 arguments. > > Here are the definitions: > > union ifs_scan { > u64 data; > struct { > u32 start :8; > u32 stop :8; > u32 rsvd :16; > u32 delay :31; > u32 sigmce :1; > }; > }; > > union ifs_status { > u64 data; > struct { > u32 chunk_num :8; > u32 chunk_stop_index :8; > u32 rsvd1 :16; > u32 error_code :8; > u32 rsvd2 :22; > u32 control_error :1; > u32 signature_error :1; > }; > }; > > Would it be better to do the bit extractions of the start/stop fields first? No, I'm just paranoid about passing structures / unions in by value and not reference. If you are fine with this, then I'm OK too. -- Steve