[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH -v5 08/11] tracing: not trace mips_timecounter_init() in MIPS

To: Wu Zhangjin <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v5 08/11] tracing: not trace mips_timecounter_init() in MIPS
From: Frederic Weisbecker <>
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 12:53:05 +0100
Cc:,,, Thomas Gleixner <>, Ralf Baechle <>, Nicholas Mc Guire <>, Richard Sandiford <>, David Daney <>, Adam Nemet <>, Patrik Kluba <>
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:received:date:from:to:cc :subject:message-id:references:mime-version:content-type :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=GAwjg/DDm6HMGzISlvwJc9e34jHJkJpGFWWyx2jyEeM=; b=H58w08NY2ZpEX/qTzC1VtvNhyzJNN+Pre8ecYcc15Mah8Fvpg++3328Fh+diFiuYmW dpOxSnBQin39aSqXsMzW0aFPwCV99YHFyuG+5648CNPQct4Z/N5R2X/eGJ3JVzSJ7tBG c3S3P+xiKStIOJoIgosf6bnalcjIlBoo+ky/E=
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; b=svLAzQjd0sYCKZMUX4GPzkN5dyorQLlGzsEYWxCq/1EgqVmTMc9APEZ2sPTvrG4s0P /JAIB2JG4jyglbr5NQQMInLGgODWhYtwEdsQUyrpHmmdN7UMgi6BLxhfaK+zVBaLHtSG qDdjxp8EiQTccIaNwV1Z+SiI8W/r/zJ+F2fdQ=
In-reply-to: <>
Original-recipient: rfc822;
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <1256550156.5642.148.camel@falcon> <20091102214351.GI4880@nowhere> <>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
On Mon, Nov 09, 2009 at 12:31:12PM +0800, Wu Zhangjin wrote:
> I think if we use something like __mips_notrace here, we may get lots of
> __ARCH_notraces here too, 'Cause some other platforms(at least, as I
> know, Microblaze will do it too) may also need to add one here, it will
> become:
> __mips_notrace __ARCH1_notrace __ARCH2_notrace .... foo() {...}
> A little ugly ;)

Yeah :)
I thought Mips would be the only one to do that.

> and If a new platform need it's __ARCH_notrace, they need to touch the
> common part of ftrace, more side-effects!
> but with __arch_notrace, the archs only need to touch it's own part,
> Although there is a side-effect as you mentioned above ;)
> So, what should we do?
> Regards,
>       Wu Zhangjin

Why not __time ?
As it's normal that such few functions that are used to read the timecounter
have fair chances to be __no_trace on archs like MIPS. Interested
archs would just need to override a default stub __time.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>