[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20080730175640.f04f81b5.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2008 17:56:40 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ftrace: dump out ftrace buffers to console on panic
On Wed, 30 Jul 2008 20:39:47 -0400 (EDT) Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> wrote:
> >
> >> + __raw_spin_lock(&ftrace_dump_lock);
> >> + dump_running = 0;
> >> + __raw_spin_unlock(&ftrace_dump_lock);
> >> +
> >> + out:
> >> + local_irq_restore(flags);
> >> +}
> >> +#endif /* CONFIG_FTRACE_DUMP_ON_OOPS */
> >
> > Do we really need a new config option for this? Would it hurt too much
> > to make it unconditionally available?
>
> I don't mind making it unconditionally available. I only added the config
> option because I thought people would like to turn it off.
>
> I'll resubmit with the above concerns fixed and without the config option.
Well.. my question about the config option was no more than a question
- I don't know the answer.
Although thinking about it, I guess that anyone who is really squeezy
on space just won't be enabling ftrace at all. Is there any reason
other than size for disabling this new feature?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists