[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20191022164023.2102fb1a@gandalf.local.home>
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2019 16:40:23 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mhiramat@...nel.org,
bristot@...hat.com, jbaron@...mai.com,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
mingo@...nel.org, namit@...are.com, hpa@...or.com, luto@...nel.org,
ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org, jpoimboe@...hat.com, jeyu@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 15/16] module: Move where we mark modules RO,X
On Tue, 22 Oct 2019 22:24:01 +0200
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> The below seems to cure it; and seems to generate identical
> events/*/format output (for my .config, with the exception of ID).
>
> It has just one section mismatch report that I'm too tired to look at
> just now.
Thanks, I'll try to take a look at it tomorrow.
>
> I'm not particularly proud of the "__function__" hack, but it works :/ I
If anything, that should be defined as a macro:
#define TRACE_EVENT_FIELD_SPECIAL "__trace_event_special__"
And use that to test?
> couldn't come up with anything else for [uk]probes which seem to have
> dynamic fields and if we're having it then syscall_enter can also make
> use of it, the syscall_metadata crud was going to be ugly otherwise.
>
> (also, win on LOC)
I'm more worried about text/data bloat. But if anything, we may be able
to deal with that later.
-- Steve
Powered by blists - more mailing lists