From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Cc: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>,
oe-kbuild-all@lists.linux.dev,
Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Florent Revest <revest@chromium.org>,
"Masami Hiramatsu (Google)" <mhiramat@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [linux-next:master 8539/9537] include/linux/ftrace.h:126:16: error: implicit declaration of function 'arch_ftrace_get_regs'; did you mean 'ftrace_get_regs'?
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2022 10:30:42 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20221122103042.07c349ee@gandalf.local.home> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Y3znIwkQQ6I1M9cF@FVFF77S0Q05N.cambridge.arm.com>
On Tue, 22 Nov 2022 15:13:39 +0000
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> wrote:
> To be honest, we just didn't think to remove static ftrace; I'm happy to remove
> that for arm64.
Please do. There's no reason for it. The *only* reason I keep it around on
x86 is to make sure it still works (for those other architectures
developing ftrace).
>
> That said, I still think it makes sense to change the code to check
> CONFIG_DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_ARGS rather than
> CONFIG_HAVE_DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_ARGS, as mentioned below, unless you intend for
> that to have an effect on static ftrace on x86?
>
> Everywhere else with DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_ARGS forces DYNAMIC_FTRACE, so it ends
> up equivalent; x86 and arm64 are the only exceptions today.
Yeah, looking at the code, I think it does make sense to just use
DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_ARGS, as that was created to combine the other two
configs anyway.
-- Steve
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-11-22 15:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-11-21 14:55 kernel test robot
2022-11-21 17:26 ` Mark Rutland
2022-11-21 17:40 ` Steven Rostedt
2022-11-22 15:13 ` Mark Rutland
2022-11-22 15:30 ` Steven Rostedt [this message]
2022-11-22 16:41 ` Mark Rutland
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20221122103042.07c349ee@gandalf.local.home \
--to=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=lkp@intel.com \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=mhiramat@kernel.org \
--cc=oe-kbuild-all@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=revest@chromium.org \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox