[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20090507215427.4256cc3c.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Thu, 7 May 2009 21:54:27 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] ring-buffer: change WARN_ON from checking
preempt_count to preemptible
On Fri, 08 May 2009 00:32:54 -0400 Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> wrote:
> From: Steven Rostedt <srostedt@...hat.com>
>
> There's a WARN_ON in the ring buffer code that makes sure preemption
> is disabled. It checks "!preempt_count()". But when CONFIG_PREEMPT is not
> enabled, preempt_count() is always zero, and this will trigger the warning.
>
> [ Impact: prevent false warning on non preemptible kernels ]
>
> Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
> ---
> kernel/trace/ring_buffer.c | 2 +-
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/trace/ring_buffer.c b/kernel/trace/ring_buffer.c
> index 3ae5ccf..3611706 100644
> --- a/kernel/trace/ring_buffer.c
> +++ b/kernel/trace/ring_buffer.c
> @@ -1688,7 +1688,7 @@ void ring_buffer_discard_commit(struct ring_buffer *buffer,
> * committed yet. Thus we can assume that preemption
> * is still disabled.
> */
> - RB_WARN_ON(buffer, !preempt_count());
> + RB_WARN_ON(buffer, preemptible());
>
> cpu = smp_processor_id();
> cpu_buffer = buffer->buffers[cpu];
smp_processor_id() will warn too.
--
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