On Wed, 29 May 2019 05:30:56 -0400 Joel Fernandes <j...@joelfernandes.org> wrote:
> Yes, I think so. Also this patch changes CALLER_ADDR0 passed to the > tracepoint because there's one more level of a non-inlined function call > in the call chain right? Very least the changelog should document this > change in functional behavior, IMO. This sounds more like a break in behavior not a functional change. I guess moving it to a header and making it a static __always_inline should be fine though. -- Steve
