[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100110031056.GA15195@nowhere>
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2010 04:10:57 +0100
From: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
To: Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>
Cc: prasad@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] ksym_tracer: Fix to make the tracer work
On Thu, Dec 31, 2009 at 01:54:35PM +0800, Li Zefan wrote:
> K.Prasad wrote:
> > Frederic must have used for_each_possible_cpu() to account for CPUs that
> > are offline at the time of registration, but may eventually turn online.
> > Since register_wide_hw_breakpoint() interface is designed to deliver
> > system-wide breakpoints, the debug registers of a new online CPU will
> > should have the breakpoints populated to comprehensively notify all
> > memory accesses over target address.
> >
> > I'd rather wait to hear from Frederic to know why
> > perf_event_create_kernel_counter() returns an error when run for an
> > offline cpu and how it can be solved.
> >
>
> See the comment in find_get_context() in kernel/perf_event.c:
>
> /*
> * We could be clever and allow to attach a event to an
> * offline CPU and activate it when the CPU comes up, but
> * that's for later.
> */
> if (!cpu_online(cpu))
> return ERR_PTR(-ENODEV);
>
> So I think we can use for_each_possible_cpu() in the future, but not now.
>
Ah, right I indeed missed that.
--
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