From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1751436AbcBKJej (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Thu, 11 Feb 2016 04:34:39 -0500
Received: from mail-pf0-f193.google.com ([209.85.192.193]:33187 "EHLO
	mail-pf0-f193.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1750761AbcBKJef (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 11 Feb 2016 04:34:35 -0500
Message-ID: <1455183268.2885.17.camel@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 4/8] ppc64 ftrace_with_regs configuration variables
From: Balbir Singh <bsingharora@gmail.com>
To: Torsten Duwe <duwe@lst.de>
Cc: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>, Jiri Kosina <jkosina@suse.cz>,
        Miroslav Benes <mbenes@suse.cz>, Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>,
        Jessica Yu <jeyu@redhat.com>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        live-patching@vger.kernel.org
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2016 20:34:28 +1100
In-Reply-To: <20160211084230.GB29683@lst.de>
References: <20160210174221.EBBEC692C8@newverein.lst.de>
	 <20160210174450.9C065692C8@newverein.lst.de>
	 <1455176897.2885.12.camel@gmail.com> <20160211084230.GB29683@lst.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Mailer: Evolution 3.18.4 (3.18.4-1.fc23) 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Thu, 2016-02-11 at 09:42 +0100, Torsten Duwe wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 06:48:17PM +1100, Balbir Singh wrote:
> > On Wed, 2016-02-10 at 17:25 +0100, Torsten Duwe wrote:
> > > +
> > > +echo "int func() { return 0; }" | \
> > > +    $* -S -x c -O2 -p -mprofile-kernel - -o - 2> /dev/null | \
> > > +    sed -n -e '/func:/,/bl _mcount/p' | grep -q TOC
> > > +
> > > +leaf_toc_result=$?
> > > +
> > 
> > leaf_toc_result failed for me with gcc 5. I'll try and grab gcc-6
> > and give the patches a spin
> 
> Don't bother. _All_ gccs are broken in that respect currently.
> AFAIK Anton is working on this. You have to fake the test, like
> static int a; return a++;
> 
> Gcc fails to set the TOC for profiled "leaf" functions, where it
> thinks no global/static symbols are referenced.
> 
> 

Thanks for the quick answer

BTW, do we expect static/non global functions to be called from
patched contexts? I understand that not supporting it will
complicate a patch.

Balbir Singh