This is the mail archive of the
systemtap@sourceware.org
mailing list for the systemtap project.
Re: [PATCH 3/4] x86: add kprobe-booster to X86_64
- From: Harvey Harrison <harvey dot harrison at gmail dot com>
- To: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo at elte dot hu>, Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth at in dot ibm dot com>, Jim Keniston <jkenisto at us dot ibm dot com>, Roland McGrath <roland at redhat dot com>, Arjan van de Ven <arjan at infradead dot org>, prasanna at in dot ibm dot com, anil dot s dot keshavamurthy at intel dot com, davem at davemloft dot net, systemtap-ml <systemtap at sources dot redhat dot com>, LKML <linux-kernel at vger dot kernel dot org>, Andrew Morton <akpm at linux-foundation dot org>
- Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 18:30:00 -0800
- Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] x86: add kprobe-booster to X86_64
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:subject:from:to:cc:in-reply-to:references:content-type:date:message-id:mime-version:x-mailer:content-transfer-encoding; bh=kjpXPtVt277ygSPtEoFPdSFQZald+ZJOKcjWQT1QOXU=; b=BZ9ls02B7sFKiarL1PgFr4dEzblXc2CXckeOwxIBUHZUr8ugYtdujOkE77y26ec2P9GvR0v7Bxqikhl8MpD61a/B9Dz2K/Kg9WmctsSlh3Z/Ku49rdiXf0IgBvQka/IVMu5+bjcGpZVl7BZIAcda3hkTVpUbBL0GNGqr967P4/E=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=subject:from:to:cc:in-reply-to:references:content-type:date:message-id:mime-version:x-mailer:content-transfer-encoding; b=nMkqamKv0CmJzdvwa84MlHpXKwSxG2mEFT0ewJ3j948hExa6Mc5S6YmEV22VrPkH9Adf/UB1Vm5gxsEktccNI6eG1rBTZQy6Fbz7Xxi8pbR47hmPr292HDiFVdZttDANB2f/2I3MckxHHQTjjTeql3mYkDIWrsAV9QgBH07pS5E=
- References: <1197930464.23402.112.camel@brick> <20071218112936.GE9002@elte.hu> <1197978160.7734.31.camel@brick> <4767D02C.6030704@redhat.com>
On Tue, 2007-12-18 at 08:50 -0500, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> Hi Harvey,
>
> Thank you for cleaning this up.
>
> Harvey Harrison wrote:
> > Subject: [PATCH] x86: kprobes leftover cleanups
> >
> > Eliminate __always_inline, all of these static functions are
> > only called once. Minor whitespace cleanup. Eliminate one
> > supefluous return at end of void function. Reverse sense of
> > #ifndef to be #ifdef to show the case only affects X86_32.
>
> Unfortunately, to prevent kprobe recursive call, all functions which
> is called from kprobes must be inlined or have __kprobes.
> If __always_inline macro still work, I prefer to use it. If not,
> it must have a __kprobe attribute like as below.
I thought all static functions that were only called once were
automatically inlined these days? Otherwise __always_inline and
inline are exactly the same in the kernel.
Harvey