lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Jun]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC][PATCH 05/13 v2] ftrace/x86: Add separate function to save regs
(2012/06/15 20:33), Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-06-15 at 17:15 +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
>
>>> It is OK for an arch to pass NULL regs. All function trace users that
>>> require regs passing must add the flag FTRACE_OPS_FL_SAVE_REGS when
>>> registering the ftrace_ops and either check if regs is not NULL or
>>> check if ARCH_SUPPORTS_FTRACE_SAVE_REGS. If the arch supports passing
>>> regs it will set this macro and pass regs for ops that request them.
>>> All other archs will just pass NULL.
>>
>> Hmm, so would you mean that user is responsible for checking
>> whether the arch supports save_regs or not?
>> I would rather like ftrace to check it as my patch has done.
>> I think ARCH_SUPPORTS_FTRACE_SAVE_REGS macro checking in all
>> handler code is something like odd...
>
> I was thinking of routines that may or may not use regs. Actually, I was
> thinking about perf in general, that could use regs if supported, or get
> its own set.
>
> But I agree that it may not be the best for those that must have regs.
>
> Perhaps we could add another flag:
>
> FTRACE_OPS_FL_SAVE_REGS_IF_SUPPORTED
>
> Where it wont error out if you have this set. But if you just pass in
> FTRACE_OPS_FL_SAVE_REGS (as kprobes does) it will fail.
>
> How's that sound?

Yeah, that's good for me. :)

Thank you,

--
Masami HIRAMATSU
Software Platform Research Dept. Linux Technology Center
Hitachi, Ltd., Yokohama Research Laboratory
E-mail: masami.hiramatsu.pt@hitachi.com


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-06-18 12:01    [W:0.059 / U:0.264 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site