On Sun, 23 Nov 2014, David Chisnall wrote:
On 21 Nov 2014, at 23:26, Scott Long wrote:
That?s a good question to look further into. I didn?t see any measurable
differences with this change. I think that the cost of the function call
itself masks the cost of a few extra instructions, but I
On Fri, 21 Nov 2014 16:26:47 -0700 Scott Long wrote:
> On Nov 20, 2014, at 11:33 PM, Rui Paulo wrote:
>> On Nov 13, 2014, at 14:11, Scott Long wrote:
>>>
>>> Author: scottl
>>> Date: Thu Nov 13 22:11:44 2014
>>> New Revision: 274489
>>> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/274489
>>>
On 21 Nov 2014, at 23:26, Scott Long wrote:
> That’s a good question to look further into. I didn’t see any measurable
> differences with this change. I think that the cost of the function call
> itself masks the cost of a few extra instructions, but I didn’t test with
> switching it on/off
On Thu, 20 Nov 2014, Rui Paulo wrote:
On Nov 13, 2014, at 14:11, Scott Long wrote:
Author: scottl
Date: Thu Nov 13 22:11:44 2014
New Revision: 274489
URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/274489
Log:
Extend earlier addition of stack frames to most of support.S. This makes
stack
> On Nov 20, 2014, at 11:33 PM, Rui Paulo wrote:
>
> On Nov 13, 2014, at 14:11, Scott Long wrote:
>>
>> Author: scottl
>> Date: Thu Nov 13 22:11:44 2014
>> New Revision: 274489
>> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/274489
>>
>> Log:
>> Extend earlier addition of stack frames to mo
On Nov 13, 2014, at 14:11, Scott Long wrote:
>
> Author: scottl
> Date: Thu Nov 13 22:11:44 2014
> New Revision: 274489
> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/274489
>
> Log:
> Extend earlier addition of stack frames to most of support.S. This makes
> stack traces in KDB, HWPMC, and
Author: scottl
Date: Thu Nov 13 22:11:44 2014
New Revision: 274489
URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/274489
Log:
Extend earlier addition of stack frames to most of support.S. This makes
stack traces in KDB, HWPMC, and DTrace much more reliable and useful.
Reviewed by: kan,