[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <49F1FE34.9060908@am.sony.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2009 11:00:20 -0700
From: Tim Bird <tim.bird@...sony.com>
To: Uwe � <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
CC: linux kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.arm.linux.org.uk>,
Russell King <rmk@....linux.org.uk>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add function graph tracer support for ARM
Uwe � wrote:
>>>> --- a/arch/arm/kernel/entry-common.S
>>>> +++ b/arch/arm/kernel/entry-common.S
>>>> @@ -135,8 +135,16 @@ ENTRY(mcount)
>>>> adr r0, ftrace_stub
>>>> cmp r0, r2
>>>> bne trace
>>>> +
>>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_FUNCTION_GRAPH_TRACER
>>>> + ldr r1, =ftrace_graph_return
>>>> + ldr r2, [r1]
>>>> + cmp r0, r2 @ if *ftrace_graph_return != ftrace_stub
>>>> + bne ftrace_graph_caller
>>>> +#endif /* CONFIG_FUNCTION_GRAPH_TRACER */
>>>> +
>>>> ldr lr, [fp, #-4] @ restore lr
>>>> - ldmia sp!, {r0-r3, pc}
>>>> + ldmia sp!, {r0-r3, pc} @ return doing nothing
>>> If ftrace_trace_function != ftrace_stub then ftrace_graph_caller isn't
>>> called. Is this correct?
...
> Yes, the comments are as good as the comments for ftrace_trace_function.
> What I meant is that with your code using both ftrace_trace_function and
> ftrace_graph_caller doesn't work, because if ftrace_trace_function !=
> ftrace_stub then the check for ftrace_trace_function is simply skipped.
OK - I understand now. I didn't think of this case, but you
are correct. This has the same behavior as the x86 case.
Whether that's good or not is hard to say. I wouldn't want
to add extra tests (since this is very much a hot path), but
maybe this should be noted somewhere. I'll test to see
how this impacts the user-visible operation of the tracers.
(I assume this means you would have to reset the function
tracer, if it was active, before invoking a function graph
tracer.)
Alternatively, maybe the logic of installing the function graph
tracer should automatically reset the function tracer?
Steve,
Should both a function trace and a function graph tracer
be allowed to be active at the same time? I would think
not, but maybe there's a use case I'm missing.
> And I just noticed something else: There is a 2nd implementation of
> mcount in arch/arm/kernel/entry-common.S for CONFIG_DYNAMIC_FTRACE
> (which is currently not selectable for ARM). Maybe add a note to this
> mcount that it needs fixing for graph tracing when it is revived?
Good catch. I'll put something in.
Thanks!!
-- Tim
=============================
Tim Bird
Architecture Group Chair, CE Linux Forum
Senior Staff Engineer, Sony Corporation of America
=============================
--
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