[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190529082248.76bb7a6c@oasis.local.home>
Date: Wed, 29 May 2019 08:22:48 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>
Cc: Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...hat.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, williams@...hat.com,
daniel@...stot.me, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@...omium.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>,
Yangtao Li <tiny.windzz@...il.com>,
Tommaso Cucinotta <tommaso.cucinotta@...tannapisa.it>
Subject: Re: [RFC 1/3] softirq: Use preempt_latency_stop/start to trace
preemption
On Wed, 29 May 2019 05:30:56 -0400
Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org> wrote:
> Yes, I think so. Also this patch changes CALLER_ADDR0 passed to the
> tracepoint because there's one more level of a non-inlined function call
> in the call chain right? Very least the changelog should document this
> change in functional behavior, IMO.
This sounds more like a break in behavior not a functional change. I
guess moving it to a header and making it a static __always_inline
should be fine though.
-- Steve
Powered by blists - more mailing lists