Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 27 Sep 2008 19:02:25 +0200 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v5] Unified trace buffer |
| |
* Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote:
> > Indeed. And on some architectures 'packed' will actually mean that > > the compiler may think that it's unaligned, and then generate much > > worse code to access the fields. So if you align things anyway (and > > you do), then 'packed' is the wrong thing to do. > > OK, I'm making v6 now with various cleanups. I'll nuke it on that one.
btw., now that it's getting into shape, could you please fix the ftrace portion:
> Subject: [RFC PATCH 2/2 v3] ftrace: make work with new ring buffer > > Note: This patch is a proof of concept, and breaks a lot of > functionality of ftrace. > > This patch simply makes ftrace work with the developmental ring > buffer.
... to not have known bugs, so that we could try it in tip/ftrace and make sure it works well in practice?
it's a ton of changes already, it would be nice to get to some stable known-working state and do delta patches from that point on, and keep its 'works well' quality.
Ingo
| |