[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190227110403.sy4djsxtukd6wasp@linutronix.de>
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2019 12:04:04 +0100
From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...pensource.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Pavan Kondeti <pkondeti@...eaurora.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 23/32] softirq: Remove stale comment
On 2019-02-12 18:14:14 [+0100], Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> __local_bh_disable_ip() is neither for strict internal use nor does it
> require the caller to disable hardirqs. Probaby a celebration for ancient
Probaby
> behaviour.
I think the point was to override the IP for the tracer. So everyone
else used local_bh_disable() and was recorded as the caller except for
softirq.c internal usage where __do_softirq() did also
"local_bh_disable()" but recorded its caller (instead recording
__do_softirq()).
Sebastian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists