Re: [KJ] value of "__attribute__((no_instrument_function))"??

[Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@us.ibm.com>]

On 19.01.2007 [03:09:07 -0500], Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> 
>   i just noticed that there are a *very* small number of routines in
> the source tree tagged with the attribute of "no_instrument_function".
> 
> $ grep -rw no_instrument_function .
> ./net/rxrpc/main.c:__attribute__((no_instrument_function));
> ./net/rxrpc/main.c:__attribute__((no_instrument_function));
> ./fs/afs/main.c:__attribute__((no_instrument_function));
> ./fs/afs/main.c:__attribute__((no_instrument_function));
> 
>   from the gcc manual:
> 
> "If -finstrument-functions is given, profiling function calls will be
> generated at entry and exit of most user-compiled functions. Functions
> with this attribute will not be so instrumented."
> 
>   that *seems* like a useful attribute so the obvious question is --
> why is it not used more widely?  that seems kind of odd.  (in fact,
> the functions with these attributes are all commented out within an
> "#if 0" so they make no difference, anyway.)

It seems like a useful attribute to *disable* instrumentation in the
kernel? Why?

Thanks,
Nish

-- 
Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@us.ibm.com>
IBM Linux Technology Center
_______________________________________________
Kernel-janitors mailing list
Kernel-janitors@lists.osdl.org
https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors