From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Steven Rostedt Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2008 14:01:11 +0000 Subject: Re: [RFC 1/2] ftrace porting of ia64 Message-Id: <1229608871.30177.41.camel@localhost.localdomain> List-Id: References: <1229570238.28616.31.camel@sli10-desk.sh.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <1229570238.28616.31.camel@sli10-desk.sh.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2008-12-18 at 11:25 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Shaohua Li wrote: > > > ftrace porting of IA64. > > TBD: > > 1. I don't how to add unwind info to the assemble code, so please > > advise. > > 2. The generic ftrace ring buffer code doesn't handle alignment well. > > With the patch, kernel will report a lot of unalignment. This is still > > under investigation. > > hm, that's weird - i recently profiled 64-bit x86 for unaligned accesses > and there didnt seem to be many. In any case, feel free to fix any > unaligned structure fields by reordering them. Will x86_64 break if something is aligned by 32 bits? The records in the buffer use to be 64 bit aligned. They are now 32 bit aligned. I wonder if we should make that alignment arch specific. -- Steve