Re: [PATCH 1/4] tracing: move __DO_TRACE out of line

[Ingo Molnar]

* Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> > > +#define DEFINE_DO_TRACE(name, proto, args)				\
> > > +	void __do_trace_##name(struct tracepoint *tp, TP_PROTO(proto))	\
> > > +	{								\
> > 
> > that needs to be marked notrace, otherwise the function tracer 
> > becomes noisy. (or even lockupy.)
> 
> I guess I'll have to put it more clearly : I am all for minimizing 
> tracepoint header dependency, but I'll be nacking this kind of 
> out-of-lining patch. Taking a function call, and moving it 
> out-of-line (thus duplicating the function call for nothing) seems 
> *really* pointless and will hurt tracer performance.

No need to nak - just say you dont like it and it gets fixed :)

I meant to suggest to Jeremy to measure the effect of this 
out-of-lining, in terms of instruction count in the hotpath.

> If thread_info.h is now so big that it needs a cleanup, I guess 
> we'll just have to do it.

Music to my ears ...

	Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/