[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180907095533.5b5febc2@gandalf.local.home>
Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2018 09:55:33 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] printk/tracing: Do not trace printk_nmi_enter()
On Fri, 7 Sep 2018 15:45:32 +0200
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> Yes really, we should not muck with the IRQ state from NMI context.
Right, and we didn't. Your patch didn't change anything, but allow for
printk_nmi_enter/exit() to be traced by ftrace, but that's wrong to
begin with because it ftrace_nmi_enter() hasn't been called yet.
-- Steve
Powered by blists - more mailing lists