From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: linux@arm.linux.org.uk (Russell King - ARM Linux) Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 15:57:50 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] ARM: ensure all sched_clock() implementations are notrace marked In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20101216155750.GA28126@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org 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 > wrote: > > ftrace requires sched_clock() to be notrace. ?Ensure that all > > implementations are so marked. > > > > Signed-off-by: Russell King > > 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 > 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. > 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.