From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S270721AbTG0KcA (ORCPT ); Sun, 27 Jul 2003 06:32:00 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S270722AbTG0KcA (ORCPT ); Sun, 27 Jul 2003 06:32:00 -0400 Received: from pc2-cwma1-4-cust86.swan.cable.ntl.com ([213.105.254.86]:39811 "EHLO lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S270721AbTG0Kb6 (ORCPT ); Sun, 27 Jul 2003 06:31:58 -0400 Subject: Re: [RFC] single return paradigm From: Alan Cox To: Samuel Thibault Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List In-Reply-To: <20030726221655.GB1148@bouh.unh.edu> References: <20030726221655.GB1148@bouh.unh.edu> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Organization: Message-Id: <1059302602.12754.3.camel@dhcp22.swansea.linux.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.2 (1.2.2-5) Date: 27 Jul 2003 11:43:22 +0100 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sad, 2003-07-26 at 23:16, Samuel Thibault wrote: > Hi, > > The "single return" paradigm of drivers/char/vt.c:tioclinux() surprised > me at first glance. But I'm now trying to maintain a patch which adds > probes at entry and exit of functions for performance instrumenting gcc will already dop that for you - and the tools already exist to extract the data I believe (at least Ingo used to have some). When you tell gcc to build with profiling it provides the right hooks for you to provide alternate code to the libc profile code x