[cc list trimmed] on 08/11/2011 22:34 Attilio Rao said the following: > 2011/11/8 Arnaud Lacombe <lacom...@gmail.com>: >> To avoid future complaints about the fact that I would be only "talk" >> without "action", I did implement what I suggested above. As it is >> quite a large patch-set, I will not post it directly here, however, it >> is available on github: > > I really think that this is way too dependent by the good health of > your tool, thus that is highly fragile. > > However, you may have more luck by just the core of your kernel > changes here, for comment and leave alone all the (ptr -> > LOCK_FILE/LOCK_LINE conversion). > > Said that, I think this logic is too fragile and likely won't be as > effective as __FILE__/__LINE__ in many cases.
I agree. If we were able to somehow automatically, magically, easily and correctly determine an instruction pointer of a caller, then it would make sense to ditch explicit passing of __FILE__/__LINE__ arguments in favor of doing instruction pointer decoding. But if we are just replacing explicit passing of (well-known) macros __FILE__/__LINE__ with explicit passing of THIS_IP, then I don't see a point. Apologies if I missed the rationale for this change. -- Andriy Gapon _______________________________________________ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
