On Thu, Jan 03, 2013 at 11:03:58AM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Thu, 2013-01-03 at 14:13 +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > In summary, from what I can see in the patch, the reason why the ifdefs > > are the way they are, and the reason the warning is there has not been > > addressed; these patches just seem to be aimed just at removing a #warning > > statement to make the warning go away. > > You're correct that this patch does not solve any of theses issues. Now, > I'm thinking that ftrace has matured where these issues don't exist, and > where they do, it will only cause noise in the trace than anything > serious. But, this needs to be looked deeper to make sure.
Looking back in the archives, it seems that we had a problem with ftrace and the unwinder polluting the trace information: http://lists.arm.linux.org.uk/lurker/message/20090604.201745.1c41ee6c.en.html There's quite a bit of discussion in that thread about this which details why we came up with what we have today. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/