[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1561646838.7py5mwzawl.naveen@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2019 20:19:06 +0530
From: "Naveen N. Rao" <naveen.n.rao@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/7] x86/ftrace: Fix use of flags in
ftrace_replace_code()
Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Jun 2019 16:53:50 +0530
> "Naveen N. Rao" <naveen.n.rao@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>
>> In commit a0572f687fb3c ("ftrace: Allow ftrace_replace_code() to be
>> schedulable), the generic ftrace_replace_code() function was modified to
>> accept a flags argument in place of a single 'enable' flag. However, the
>> x86 version of this function was not updated. Fix the same.
>>
>> Fixes: a0572f687fb3c ("ftrace: Allow ftrace_replace_code() to be schedulable")
>
> I don't mind this change, but it's not a bug, and I'm not sure it
> should have the fixes tag. The reason being, the
> FTRACE_MODIFY_ENABLE_FL is only set when ftrace is called by with the
> command flag FTRACE_MAY_SLEEP, which is never done on x86.
I guess you meant to say that *FTRACE_MODIFY_MAY_SLEEP_FL* is only set
with FTRACE_MAY_SLEEP.
>
> That said, I'm fine with the change as it makes it more robust, but by
> adding the fixes tag, you're going to get this into all the stable
> code, and I'm not sure that's really necessary.
Agreed. Thanks for pointing this out. We can drop this patch from this
series and I will re-post this as a simpler cleanup later on.
Thanks,
Naveen
Powered by blists - more mailing lists