[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <121a6b11-2fe1-6d9b-2861-a8ef8b42c452@amd.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2020 14:38:14 -0600
From: Kim Phillips <kim.phillips@....com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
rostedt@...dmis.org
Cc: mingo@...nel.org, joel@...lfernandes.org,
gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, gustavo@...eddedor.com,
tglx@...utronix.de, paulmck@...nel.org, josh@...htriplett.org,
mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com, jiangshanlai@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 9/9] perf,tracing: Allow function tracing when !RCU
On 2/12/20 3:01 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> Since perf is now able to deal with !rcu_is_watching() contexts,
> remove the restraint.
>
> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@...radead.org>
> ---
> kernel/trace/trace_event_perf.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> --- a/kernel/trace/trace_event_perf.c
> +++ b/kernel/trace/trace_event_perf.c
> @@ -477,7 +477,7 @@ static int perf_ftrace_function_register
> {
> struct ftrace_ops *ops = &event->ftrace_ops;
>
> - ops->flags = FTRACE_OPS_FL_RCU;
> + ops->flags = 0;
> ops->func = perf_ftrace_function_call;
> ops->private = (void *)(unsigned long)nr_cpu_ids;
If this is the last user of the flag, should all remaining
FTRACE_OPS_FL_RCU references be removed, too?
Thanks,
Kim
Powered by blists - more mailing lists