[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1292530156.22905.1.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 15:09:16 -0500
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Jason Baron <jbaron@...hat.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, athieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca,
hpa@...or.com, mingo@...e.hu, tglx@...utronix.de,
andi@...stfloor.org, roland@...hat.com, rth@...hat.com,
masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com, fweisbec@...il.com,
avi@...hat.com, davem@...emloft.net, sam@...nborg.org,
ddaney@...iumnetworks.com, michael@...erman.id.au,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC 1/2] jump label: make enable/disable o(1)
On Thu, 2010-12-16 at 14:48 -0500, Jason Baron wrote:
>
> > static inline int atomic_read(const atomic_t *v)
> > {
> > return (*(volatile int *)&(v)->counter);
> > }
> >
> > The volatile simply forces a load to be emitted.
>
> Mathieu, what do you think? Are you ok with an atomic_read() for
> checking if a tracepoint is enabled, when jump labels are disabled?
Note, I'm fine with this method too. An atomic_read() is extremely fast.
The worse that it does is to prevent gcc from optimizing a little, which
we already cause it to do due to the asm goto that we use.
-- Steve
--
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