[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20151202145032.GA5255@krava.brq.redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2015 15:50:32 +0100
From: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ftrace: Remove use of control list and ops
On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 09:27:00AM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Dec 2015 09:58:26 +0100
> Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 11:56:55AM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> >
> > SNIP
> >
> > > -static void ftrace_ops_recurs_func(unsigned long ip, unsigned long parent_ip,
> > > +static void ftrace_ops_assist_func(unsigned long ip, unsigned long parent_ip,
> > > struct ftrace_ops *op, struct pt_regs *regs)
> > > {
> > > int bit;
> > >
> > > + if ((op->flags & FTRACE_OPS_FL_RCU) && !rcu_is_watching())
> > > + return;
> > > +
> > > bit = trace_test_and_set_recursion(TRACE_LIST_START, TRACE_LIST_MAX);
> > > if (bit < 0)
> > > return;
> > >
> > > - op->func(ip, parent_ip, op, regs);
> > > + preempt_disable_notrace();
> > >
> > > + if (!(op->flags & FTRACE_OPS_FL_PER_CPU) ||
> > > + ftrace_function_local_disabled(op)) {
> >
> > should be !ftrace_function_local_disabled(op) in here,
> > I passed my test with attached patch
> >
>
> Can you retest with this patch:
sure, but other than the declaration removal it's the same change
jirka
--
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