[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1252678183.7126.34.camel@laptop>
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2009 16:09:43 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <compudj@...stal.dyndns.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] tracing/profile: add ref count for registering
profile events
On Fri, 2009-09-11 at 16:04 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-09-11 at 09:54 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>
> > +#ifdef MODULE
> > +# define event_trace_up_ref() \
> > + do { \
> > + if (!try_module_get(THIS_MODULE)) { \
> > + atomic_dec(&event_call->profile_count); \
> > + return -ENOENT; \
> > + } \
> > + } while (0)
> > +# define event_trace_down_ref() module_put(THIS_MODULE)
> > +#else
> > +# define event_trace_up_ref() do { } while (0)
> > +# define event_trace_down_ref() do { } while (0)
> > +#endif
>
> That's like truely gruesomely ugly.
>
> At the very least write it like:
>
> int event_trace_up_ref(struct ftrace_event_call *call)
> {
> if (!try_module_get(THIS_MODULE)) {
> atomic_dev(&call->profile_count);
> return -ENOENT;
> }
> return 0;
> }
Or we can go with Li's original patch, that was less ugly.
I still think tracepoints/markers should sort this out, because we now
have a sematic difference between the two wrt modules.
--
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