[Top] [All Lists]

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

Subject: Re: [PATCH -v5 08/11] tracing: not trace mips_timecounter_init() in MIPS
From: Steven Rostedt <>
Date: Mon, 09 Nov 2009 07:54:48 -0500
Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <>,,, Thomas Gleixner <>, Ralf Baechle <>, Nicholas Mc Guire <>, Richard Sandiford <>, David Daney <>, Adam Nemet <>, Patrik Kluba <>
In-reply-to: <>
Original-recipient: rfc822;
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <1256550156.5642.148.camel@falcon> <20091102214351.GI4880@nowhere> <>
On Mon, 2009-11-09 at 12:31 +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 ;)

I agree, that is ugly.

> 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?

Just do it in the Makefile. We can add __arch_notrace, and then in the
Makefile define it with the arch.

ifeq ($(ARCH), MIPS)
        CFLAGS_foo.o = -D__arch_notrace=notrace

And we can simply define __arch_notrace in a header:

#ifndef __arch_notrace
# define __arch_notrace

I much rather uglify the Makefile than the code. 

-- Steve

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