Re: [PATCH v7 bpf-next 06/10] tracepoint: compute num_args at build time
From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
Date: 2018-03-28 19:22:26
Also in:
netdev
----- On Mar 28, 2018, at 2:54 PM, rostedt rostedt@goodmis.org wrote:
On Wed, 28 Mar 2018 11:19:34 -0700 Alexei Starovoitov [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
On 3/28/18 11:10 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote:quoted
On Wed, 28 Mar 2018 11:03:24 -0700 Alexei Starovoitov [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
I can live with this overhead if Mathieu insists, but I prefer to keep it in 'struct tracepoint'. Thoughts?I'm fine with keeping it as is. We could probably use it for future enhancements in perf and ftrace. Perhaps, we should just add a: #ifdef CONFIG_BPF_EVENTS Around the use cases of num_args.it sounds like a good idea, but implementation wise it will be ifdef CONFIG_BPF_EVENTS around u32 num_args; in struct tracepoint and similar double definition of DEFINE_TRACE_FN. One that uses num_args to init struct tracepoint and one that doesn't ? Feels like serious uglification of already macros heavy code. Also what it will address?32bit bloat ;-) But I agree, it's not worth uglifying it. -- Stevequoted
cache hot/cold argument clearly doesn't apply.
In the current situation I'm fine with adding this extra field to struct tracepoint. However, we should keep in mind to move all non-required cache-cold fields to a separate section at some point. Clearly just this single field won't make a difference due to other fields and padding. Thanks, Mathieu -- Mathieu Desnoyers EfficiOS Inc. http://www.efficios.com