Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 23 Feb 2018 17:02:41 -0800 (PST) | Subject | Re: [patches] Re: [PATCH v4 0/6] Add dynamic ftrace support for RISC-V platforms | From | Palmer Dabbelt <> |
| |
On Tue, 20 Feb 2018 18:45:39 PST (-0800), alankao@andestech.com wrote: > On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 01:13:15PM +0800, Alan Quey-Liang Kao(高魁良) wrote: >> This patch set includes the building blocks of dynamic ftrace features >> for RISC-V machines. >> >> Changes in v4: >> - Organize code structure according to changes in v3 >> - Rebase onto the riscv-linux-4.15 branch at github's >> riscv/riscv-linux repo. Note that this set is based on the previous >> ftrace patch, which provided basic support. >> >> Changes in v3: >> - Replace the nops at the tracer call sites into "call ftrace_stub" >> instructions for better understanding (1/6, 2/6 and 5/6) >> >> Changes in v2: >> - Fix the return value as writing to kernel text goes wrong (2/6) >> - Replace manual comparisons by calling memcmp (2/6) >> - Simplify the conditional assignment in the Makefile (1/6) >> >> Alan Kao (6): >> riscv/ftrace: Add RECORD_MCOUNT support >> riscv/ftrace: Add dynamic function tracer support >> riscv/ftrace: Add dynamic function graph tracer support >> riscv/ftrace: Add ARCH_SUPPORTS_FTRACE_OPS support >> riscv/ftrace: Add DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_REGS support >> riscv/ftrace: Add HAVE_FUNCTION_GRAPH_RET_ADDR_PTR support >> >> arch/riscv/Kconfig | 3 + >> arch/riscv/Makefile | 3 + >> arch/riscv/include/asm/ftrace.h | 56 ++++++++++ >> arch/riscv/kernel/Makefile | 5 +- >> arch/riscv/kernel/ftrace.c | 175 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- >> arch/riscv/kernel/mcount-dyn.S | 239 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> arch/riscv/kernel/mcount.S | 22 ++-- >> arch/riscv/kernel/stacktrace.c | 6 + >> scripts/recordmcount.pl | 5 + >> 9 files changed, 501 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-) >> create mode 100644 arch/riscv/kernel/mcount-dyn.S >> >> -- >> 2.15.1 >> > > Any comments?
Sorry, my email latency is a bit long now as I'm still backed up from FOSDEM. This looks good, it should already be in our for-next branch.
| |