Re: [PATCH] Linux Kernel Markers 0.20 for 2.6.17

[Atsushi Nemoto <anemo@mba.ocn.ne.jp>]

On Sat, 30 Sep 2006 14:04:43 -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers <compudj@krystal.dyndns.org> wrote:
> +#define MARK(name, format, args...) \
> +	do { \
> +		static marker_probe_func *__mark_call_##name = \
> +					__mark_empty_function; \
> +		volatile static char __marker_enable_##name = 0; \
> +		static const struct __mark_marker_c __mark_c_##name \
> +			__attribute__((section(".markers.c"))) = \
> +			{ #name, &__mark_call_##name, format } ; \
> +		static const struct __mark_marker __mark_##name \
> +			__attribute__((section(".markers"), unused)) = \
> +			{ &__mark_c_##name, &__marker_enable_##name } ; \
> +		if (unlikely(__marker_enable_##name)) { \
> +			preempt_disable(); \
> +			(*__mark_call_##name)(format, ## args); \
> +			preempt_enable_no_resched(); \
> +		} \
> +	} while(0)

When I compiled this with gcc 4.1.1 (mips), ".markers" section was
empty.

I suppose "unused" attribute is not suitable for modern gcc.  Maybe
__attribute_used__ should be used?

The __attrribute_used__ is defined in compiler-gcc3.h as:

#if __GNUC_MINOR__ >= 3
# define __attribute_used__	__attribute__((__used__))
#else
# define __attribute_used__	__attribute__((__unused__))
#endif

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