[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <51FFEC56.6040206@linux.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 05 Aug 2013 11:17:58 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...ux.intel.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
CC: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, gcc <gcc@....gnu.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
David Daney <ddaney.cavm@...il.com>,
Behan Webster <behanw@...verseincode.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Subject: Re: [RFC] gcc feature request: Moving blocks into sections
On 08/05/2013 10:55 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>
> Well, as tracepoints are being added quite a bit in Linux, my concern is
> with the inlined functions that they bring. With jump labels they are
> disabled in a very unlikely way (the static_key_false() is a nop to skip
> the code, and is dynamically enabled to a jump).
>
Have you considered using traps for tracepoints? A trapping instruction
can be as small as a single byte. The downside, of course, is that it
is extremely suppressed -- the trap is always expensive -- and you then
have to do a lookup to find the target based on the originating IP.
-hpa
--
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