Re: [PATCH 02/22 -v7] Add basic support for gcc profiler instrumentation

!MAILaRCHIVE_VOTE_RePLACE
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...>, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@...>, Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...>, Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@...>, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...>, Tim Bird <tim.bird@...>, Sam Ravnborg <sam@...>, Frank Ch. Eigler <fche@...>, John Stultz <johnstul@...>, Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...>, Steven Rostedt <srostedt@...>
Date: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 - 9:21 am

Steven Rostedt wrote:


(and the corresponding 64-bit version)

Is the impact of this change on the (already expensive) mcount_enabled
case negligible? I worried about use cases where we want to gain some
(relative) worst-case numbers via these instrumentations.

In my personal priority scheme, CONFIG_MCOUNT=y && !mcount_enabled comes
after mcount_enabled.

Jan

-- 
Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT SE 2
Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux
--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Re: [PATCH 02/22 -v7] Add basic support for gcc profiler ins..., Jan Kiszka, (Wed Jan 30, 9:21 am)