[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1316775722.9084.2.camel@twins>
Date:	Fri, 23 Sep 2011 13:02:02 +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>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 21/21] tracing: Add optional percpu buffers for
 trace_printk()
On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 18:09 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> 
> Currently, trace_printk() uses a single buffer to write into
> to calculate the size and format needed to save the trace. To
> do this safely in an SMP environment, a spin_lock() is taken
> to only allow one writer at a time to the buffer. But this could
> also affect what is being traced, and add synchronization that
> would not be there otherwise. 
so trace_printk() isn't NMI safe? #$%@^%@@$%@
--
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
 
