[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1258908645.28730.813.camel@laptop>
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2009 17:50:45 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...hat.com>,
Jason Baron <jbaron@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] tracing: Use the perf recursion protection from
trace event
On Sun, 2009-11-22 at 17:37 +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> That's cleaner but adds an unnecessary overhead in the trace event
> path. We already disable the interrupts there. That's why I preferred
> to let the caller decide.
The trace path is already far from optimal, so I'd rather penalize that
than the regular swcounter path.
--
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