lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Dec]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2] riscv/ftrace: Add basic support
On Tue, 12 Dec 2017 15:08:00 +0800
Alan Kao <nonerkao@gmail.com> wrote:

> > It's not a big deal, though -- we can fix these later. The more interesting
> > thing here is that this code means our `-pg` stuff is now part of the GCC
> > ABI, which is something I'd never though of before. I've added Jim, our GCC
> > guy.
> >
> > Jim: do you mind checking to make sure the GCC profiling support is sane?
> > Specifically, I'm thinking:
> >
> > * Are there any profiling features we don't support that would require an
> > ABI break?
> > * Is there a way to add future ISA extensions without breaking the ABI?
> > * Should we document this as part of the ELF psABI specification?
> >
> > Even though this isn't user-visible as far an Linux is concerned, it'd be a
> > bit of a pain to have to break this ABI because we did something brain-dead.
> > Since there's a bit of time before 7.3.0, I think it'd be OK to consider
> > breaking the profiling ABI if there's a good reason.
> >
>
> As far as I can tell, the `-pg` flag only inserts the _mcount call after every
> valid function prologue and seems breaking no existing ABI. But indeed
> it would be good if compiler guys can take a look at the gcc profiling
> features.

This is an interesting discussion, although I'm a bit confused. What
ABI are you worried about breaking?

-- Steve

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-12-13 01:35    [W:0.093 / U:0.292 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site