Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 1/8] ftrace: add ftrace_init_nop()
To:     Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc:     Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        catalin.marinas@arm.com, deller@gmx.de, duwe@suse.de,
        James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com, james.morse@arm.com,
        jeyu@kernel.org, jpoimboe@redhat.com, jthierry@redhat.com,
        linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org, mingo@redhat.com,
        peterz@infradead.org, svens@stackframe.org,
        takahiro.akashi@linaro.org, will@kernel.org
References: <20191029165832.33606-1-mark.rutland@arm.com>
 <20191029165832.33606-2-mark.rutland@arm.com>
 <daad0785-a33f-3cfb-cf0f-657b6c677257@arm.com>
 <20191104081136.645e9b1a@grimm.local.home>
From:   Amit Kachhap <amit.kachhap@arm.com>
Message-ID: <ca7dd81e-5d98-c0f6-3d84-4f2cc20f4676@arm.com>
Date:   Tue, 5 Nov 2019 12:29:23 +0530
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/60.6.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20191104081136.645e9b1a@grimm.local.home>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk


On 11/4/19 6:41 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Sat, 2 Nov 2019 17:49:00 +0530
> Amit Daniel Kachhap <amit.kachhap@arm.com> wrote:
> 
>> Now that ftrace_init_nop is also an arch implemented function so it may
>> be added in Documentation/trace/ftrace-design.rst along with
>> ftrace_make_nop.
>> In general also, adding some description about patchable-function-entry
>> in kernel Documentation will be useful.
> 
> I think this part is outside the scope of this patch set. Honestly, I
> need to chisel out some time to rewrite the ftrace-design document, as
> that's been long needed. But that can come at a later time. I'm
> currently rewriting some of it now, so it will be best to not waste
> effort to update a document that will soon become stale. ;-)
Yes it makes sense.

Thanks,
Amit
> 
> -- Steve
>