Re: [PATCH] Linux Kernel Markers 0.13 for 2.6.17

[Jeremy Fitzhardinge]

Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Ok, so as far as I can see, we can only control the execution flow by modifying
> values in the output list of the asm.
>
> Do you think the following would work ?
>
>
> #define MARK_JUMP(name, format, args...) \
>         do { \
>                 char condition; \
>                 asm volatile(   ".section .markers, \"a\";\n\t" \
>                                         ".long 0f;\n\t" \
>                                         ".previous;\n\t" \
>                                         "0:\n\t" \
>                                         "movb $0,%1;\n\t" \
>                                 : "+m" (__marker_sequencer), \
>                                 "=r" (condition) : ); \
>                 if(unlikely(condition)) { \
>                         MARK_CALL(name, format, ## args); \
>                 } \
>         } while(0)
>   

Yep, that looks reasonable.  Though you could just directly test a 
per-marker enable flag, rather than using "condition"...

   J
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/