From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kbuild-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:49514 "EHLO mail.kernel.org"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S1726634AbgBSTnh (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org>);
        Wed, 19 Feb 2020 14:43:37 -0500
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2020 14:43:33 -0500
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] tracing: Wrap section comparison in
 tracer_alloc_buffers with COMPARE_SECTIONS
Message-ID: <20200219144333.1ce3f9ea@gandalf.local.home>
In-Reply-To: <20200219192249.GA8840@ubuntu-m2-xlarge-x86>
References: <20200219045423.54190-1-natechancellor@gmail.com>
        <20200219045423.54190-4-natechancellor@gmail.com>
        <20200219093445.386f1c09@gandalf.local.home>
        <CAKwvOdm-N1iX0SMxGDV5Vf=qS5uHPdH3S-TRs-065BuSOdKt1w@mail.gmail.com>
        <20200219181619.GV31668@ziepe.ca>
        <CAKwvOd=8vb5eOjiLg96zr25Xsq_Xge_Ym7RsNqKK8g+ZR9KWzA@mail.gmail.com>
        <20200219192249.GA8840@ubuntu-m2-xlarge-x86>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kbuild-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kbuild.vger.kernel.org>
To: Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@gmail.com>
Cc: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>, Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>, Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org>, Michal Marek <michal.lkml@markovi.net>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Jason Baron <jbaron@akamai.com>, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Linux Kbuild mailing list <linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org>, linux-arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>, Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@kvack.org>, clang-built-linux <clang-built-linux@googlegroups.com>

On Wed, 19 Feb 2020 12:22:49 -0700
Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@gmail.com> wrote:

> Yes, thank you for the analysis and further discussion! I have done some
> rudimentary printk debugging in QEMU and it looks like these are produce
> the same value:
> 
> __stop___trace_bprintk_fmt
> &__stop___trace_bprintk_fmt
> &__start___trace_bprintk_fmt[0]
> 
> as well as
> 
> __stop___trace_bprintk_fmt != __start___trace_bprintk_fmt
> &__stop___trace_bprintk_fmt != &__start___trace_bprintk_fmt
> &__stop___trace_bprintk_fmt[0] != &__start___trace_bprintk_fmt[0]
> 
> I'll use the second one once I confirm this is true in all callspots
> with both Clang and GCC, since it looks cleaner. Let me know if there
> are any objections to that.

Myself and I'm sure others would be fine with this approach as it is
still readable. I was just against the encapsulating the logic in a
strange macro that killed readability.

I haven't looked at the resulting assembly from these, and will
currently take your word for it ;-)  Of course, I will thoroughly test
any patches to this code to make sure it does not hurt functionality.

-- Steve