So now the hot path participates in sorting, folding, etc:
$ ./scripts/stack.py ./lfs.ci ./lfs_util.ci \
-Dfunction=lfsr_mount -t -sframe
function frame limit
lfsr_mount 96 2736
|-> lfsr_mdir_commit 512 2368
|-> lfsr_btree_commit__.constprop 336 1648
|-> lfs_alloc 272 1296
|-> lfsr_btree_commit 208 1856
|-> lfsr_btree_lookupnext_ 208 720
|-> lfsr_mtree_gc 192 2560
|-> lfsr_mtree_traverse 176 1024
|-> lfsr_rbyd_lookupnext 160 448
|-> lfsr_bd_readtag.constprop 128 288
|-> lfsr_mtree_lookup 128 848
|-> lfsr_bd_read 80 160
|-> lfsr_bd_read__ 80 80
|-> lfsr_fs_gc 80 2640
|-> lfsr_rbyd_sublookup 64 512
'-> lfsr_rbyd_alloc 16 1312
TOTAL 96 2736
This risks some rather unintuitive behavior now that the hot path
rendering no longer matches the call stack, but in theory the extra
sorting features are more useful?
This is a bit of an experiment, if this is more confusing than useful,
we can always revert to the strict call-order ordering.
Note that you can _usually_ get the call-order ordering by sorting by
limit, but this trick breaks if any call frames are zero sized...
Christopher Haster
96ddc72481