[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130103162359.GR2631@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2013 16:23:59 +0000
From: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: Keun-O Park <kpark3469@...il.com>, fweisbec@...il.com,
mingo@...hat.com, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, sahara <keun-o.park@...driver.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm: make return_address available for ARM_UNWIND
On Thu, Jan 03, 2013 at 11:03:58AM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Thu, 2013-01-03 at 14:13 +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > In summary, from what I can see in the patch, the reason why the ifdefs
> > are the way they are, and the reason the warning is there has not been
> > addressed; these patches just seem to be aimed just at removing a #warning
> > statement to make the warning go away.
>
> You're correct that this patch does not solve any of theses issues. Now,
> I'm thinking that ftrace has matured where these issues don't exist, and
> where they do, it will only cause noise in the trace than anything
> serious. But, this needs to be looked deeper to make sure.
Looking back in the archives, it seems that we had a problem with ftrace
and the unwinder polluting the trace information:
http://lists.arm.linux.org.uk/lurker/message/20090604.201745.1c41ee6c.en.html
There's quite a bit of discussion in that thread about this which details
why we came up with what we have today.
--
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