All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: takahiro.akashi@linaro.org (AKASHI Takahiro)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] recordmcount: arm64: replace the ignored mcount call into nop
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2015 14:43:56 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5631B21C.3060504@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20151028115825.GB29512@arm.com>

On 10/28/2015 08:58 PM, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 04:16:19AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>> On Wed, 28 Oct 2015 16:04:05 +0800
>> Li Bin <huawei.libin@huawei.com> wrote:
>>
>>> By now, the recordmcount only records the function that in
>>> following sections:
>>> .text/.ref.text/.sched.text/.spinlock.text/.irqentry.text/
>>> .kprobes.text/.text.unlikely
>>>
>>> For the function that not in these sections, the call mcount
>>> will be in place and not be replaced when kernel boot up. And
>>> it will bring performance overhead, such as do_mem_abort (in
>>> .exception.text section). This patch make the call mcount to
>>> nop for this case in recordmcount.

The patch itself is fine (it might be a good idea to describe
what 0x94000000 means though), but
I'm wondering whether we have any reason to exclude .exception.text
from tracing.
In my understandings, this attribute (.exception.text) is utilized
solely for pretty printing in dump_backtrace().

Thanks,
-Takahiro AKASHI

>> I can take this in my tree with an Ack from the ARM64 maintainers.
>
> Looks like it does what it says on the tin:
>
>    Acked-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
>
> Will
>

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: AKASHI Takahiro <takahiro.akashi@linaro.org>
To: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: Li Bin <huawei.libin@huawei.com>,
	catalin.marinas@arm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, guohanjun@huawei.com,
	dingtianhong@huawei.com, zhouchengming1@huawei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] recordmcount: arm64: replace the ignored mcount call into nop
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2015 14:43:56 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5631B21C.3060504@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20151028115825.GB29512@arm.com>

On 10/28/2015 08:58 PM, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 04:16:19AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>> On Wed, 28 Oct 2015 16:04:05 +0800
>> Li Bin <huawei.libin@huawei.com> wrote:
>>
>>> By now, the recordmcount only records the function that in
>>> following sections:
>>> .text/.ref.text/.sched.text/.spinlock.text/.irqentry.text/
>>> .kprobes.text/.text.unlikely
>>>
>>> For the function that not in these sections, the call mcount
>>> will be in place and not be replaced when kernel boot up. And
>>> it will bring performance overhead, such as do_mem_abort (in
>>> .exception.text section). This patch make the call mcount to
>>> nop for this case in recordmcount.

The patch itself is fine (it might be a good idea to describe
what 0x94000000 means though), but
I'm wondering whether we have any reason to exclude .exception.text
from tracing.
In my understandings, this attribute (.exception.text) is utilized
solely for pretty printing in dump_backtrace().

Thanks,
-Takahiro AKASHI

>> I can take this in my tree with an Ack from the ARM64 maintainers.
>
> Looks like it does what it says on the tin:
>
>    Acked-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
>
> Will
>

  reply	other threads:[~2015-10-29  5:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-10-28  8:04 [PATCH] recordmcount: arm64: replace the ignored mcount call into nop Li Bin
2015-10-28  8:04 ` Li Bin
2015-10-28  8:16 ` Steven Rostedt
2015-10-28  8:16   ` Steven Rostedt
2015-10-28 11:58   ` Will Deacon
2015-10-28 11:58     ` Will Deacon
2015-10-29  5:43     ` AKASHI Takahiro [this message]
2015-10-29  5:43       ` AKASHI Takahiro
2015-10-29 13:35 ` kbuild test robot
2015-10-29 13:35   ` kbuild test robot
2015-10-29 15:09   ` Will Deacon
2015-10-29 15:09     ` Will Deacon
2015-10-30  6:00     ` libin
2015-10-30  6:00       ` libin
2015-11-02 18:26       ` Steven Rostedt
2015-11-02 18:26         ` Steven Rostedt
2015-11-02 18:28         ` Will Deacon
2015-11-02 18:28           ` Will Deacon
2015-11-02 19:34           ` Steven Rostedt
2015-11-02 19:34             ` Steven Rostedt

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=5631B21C.3060504@linaro.org \
    --to=takahiro.akashi@linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.