[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1370379489.9844.7.camel@gandalf.local.home>
Date: Tue, 04 Jun 2013 16:58:09 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Seiji Aguchi <seiji.aguchi@....com>
Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"mingo@...e.hu" <mingo@...e.hu>, "bp@...en8.de" <bp@...en8.de>,
"linux-edac@...r.kernel.org" <linux-edac@...r.kernel.org>,
"tony.luck@...el.com" <tony.luck@...el.com>,
"dle-develop@...ts.sourceforge.net"
<dle-develop@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
Tomoki Sekiyama <tomoki.sekiyama@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v13 3/3] trace,x86: Add irq vector tracepoints
On Tue, 2013-06-04 at 20:20 +0000, Seiji Aguchi wrote:
> Steven,
>
> >
> > Hmm, maybe we can do it. Have two counters, a debug_idt_ctr and a
> > trace_idt_ctr, then have a function that basically does this:
> >
> > if (this_cpu_read(debug_idt_ctr))
>
> I think we can use "debug_stack_use_ctr" for the checking.
> Is it correct?
> Or, do I need to introduce a new debug_idt_ctr?
>
No, it's the same variable. I was thinking we should rename it too, as
debug_stack_use_ctr, doesn't really describe what is happening anymore.
-- Steve
--
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