[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20091208081112.GF4989@nowhere>
Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2009 09:11:14 +0100
From: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
To: Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/13] tracing: Move a printk out of
ftrace_raw_reg_event_foo()
On Tue, Dec 08, 2009 at 03:49:27PM +0800, Li Zefan wrote:
> >> -static void ftrace_event_enable_disable(struct ftrace_event_call *call,
> >> +static int ftrace_event_enable_disable(struct ftrace_event_call *call,
> >> int enable)
> >> {
> >> + int ret = 0;
> >> +
> >> switch (enable) {
> >> case 0:
> >> if (call->enabled) {
> >> @@ -131,12 +133,19 @@ static void ftrace_event_enable_disable(struct ftrace_event_call *call,
> >> break;
> >> case 1:
> >> if (!call->enabled) {
> >> + ret = call->regfunc(call);
> >> + if (ret) {
> >> + pr_info("event trace: Could not enable event "
> >> + "%s\n", call->name);
> >> + break;
> >> + }
> >> call->enabled = 1;
> >> tracing_start_cmdline_record();
> >> - call->regfunc(call);
> >
> > That seems to open a tiny window during which we'll lose
> > some pid -> comm resolution records.
> >
> > We should probably keep the previous call order.
> >
>
> Hm, actually the tiny window is already there in that
> tracing_stop_cmdline_record() is called before call->unregfunc()..
>
> So I can send a fix-up patch later.
The presence of a previous race window doesn't justify we add
a new one :)
I'll fix that while applying the patch.
Thanks.
--
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