Hi Björn, On Fri, Mar 8, 2024 at 11:16 AM Björn Töpel <bj...@kernel.org> wrote: > > > > If I remember from Steven's talk, x86 uses dynamically allocated trampolines > > for per callsite tracers, would CALL_OPS provide better performance than > > that? > > Probably not, and it was really a tongue-in-cheek comment -- nothing I > encourage you to do! > > Now, I think a better approach for RISC-V would be implementing what x86 > has (arch_ftrace_update_trampoline()), rather than CALL_OPS for RISC-V. > > Thoughts?
I am going to spin some patches for implementing arch_ftrace_update_trampoline() for RISC-V, then we can compare the two approaches and see which is better. But I agree that arch_ftrace_update_trampoline() is a better approach given that we can jump anywhere with auipc/jalr. Thanks, Puranjay
