[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20060922152737.GA30668@Krystal>
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2006 11:27:37 -0400
From: Mathieu Desnoyers <compudj@...stal.dyndns.org>
To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
Cc: Martin Bligh <mbligh@...gle.com>,
"Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@...hat.com>,
Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>,
prasanna@...ibm.com, Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Paul Mundt <lethal@...ux-sh.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Jes Sorensen <jes@....com>, Tom Zanussi <zanussi@...ibm.com>,
Richard J Moore <richardj_moore@...ibm.com>,
Michel Dagenais <michel.dagenais@...ymtl.ca>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
William Cohen <wcohen@...hat.com>, ltt-dev@...fik.org,
systemtap@...rces.redhat.com, Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Linux Kernel Markers 0.7 for 2.6.17 (with type checking!)
* Jeremy Fitzhardinge (jeremy@...p.org) wrote:
> Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> >* Jeremy Fitzhardinge (jeremy@...p.org) wrote:
> >
> >>Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> >>
> >>>#define MARK_SYM(name) \
> >>> do { \
> >>> __label__ here; \
> >>> volatile static void *__mark_kprobe_##name \
> >>> asm (MARK_CALL_PREFIX#name) \
> >>> __attribute__((unused)) = &&here; \
> >>>here: \
> >>> do { } while(0); \
> >>> } while(0)
> >>>
> >>>Which fixes the problem. Some tests showed me that the compiler does not
> >>>unroll
> >>>an otherwise unrolled loop when this specific macro is called. (test
> >>>done with
> >>>-funroll-all-loops).
> >>>
> >>Eh? I thought you wanted to avoid changing the generated code?
> >>Inhibiting loop unrolling could be a pretty large change...
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Yes, if possible. But letting gcc duplicate those symbols brings many
> >questions,
> >such as : how can we name each of them differently ? Is there any way to
> >automatically increment an "identifier" counter in assembly ?
>
> Use a section instead:
>
> struct marker {
> const char *name;
> const void *location;
> };
>
> #define MARKER_SYM(name)
> do {
> __label__ here;
> here: asm volatile(".section \".markers\"; .long %0, %1;
> .previous" : : "m" (#name), "m" (*&&here));\
> } while(0);
>
> Not a linker symbol, but it does let you find all the places containing
> a particular mark.
>
Very clever idea, as it lessens the impact on the compiler optimisations. Any
ideas about how we could fit in a list of "read" memory constraints based on a
vargs list in the macro ?
Mathieu
OpenPGP public key: http://krystal.dyndns.org:8080/key/compudj.gpg
Key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists