Re: [RFC PATCH] riscv: Implement HAVE_DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_CALL_OPS

[Björn Töpel]

Puranjay Mohan <puranjay12@xxxxxxxxx> writes:

>> Now, I think a better approach for RISC-V would be implementing what x86
>> has (arch_ftrace_update_trampoline()), rather than CALL_OPS for RISC-V.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>
> I am going to spin some patches for implementing
> arch_ftrace_update_trampoline() for
> RISC-V, then we can compare the two approaches and see which is
> better. But I agree
> that arch_ftrace_update_trampoline() is a better approach given that
> we can jump anywhere
> with auipc/jalr.

Yup, and the text size wont blow up.


Cheers,
Björn