[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20240205075504.1b55f29c@rorschach.local.home>
Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2024 07:55:04 -0500
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Sven Schnelle <svens@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>, Mathieu Desnoyers
<mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Mete Durlu <meted@...ux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tracing: use ring_buffer_record_is_set_on() in
tracer_tracing_is_on()
On Mon, 5 Feb 2024 07:53:40 +0100
Sven Schnelle <svens@...ux.ibm.com> wrote:
> tracer_tracing_is_on() checks whether record_disabled is not zero. This
> checks both the record_disabled counter and the RB_BUFFER_OFF flag.
> Reading the source it looks like this function should only check for
> the RB_BUFFER_OFF flag. Therefore use ring_buffer_record_is_set_on().
> This fixes spurious fails in the 'test for function traceon/off triggers'
> test from the ftrace testsuite when the system is under load.
>
I've seen these spurious failures too, but haven't looked deeper into
it. Thanks,
-- Steve
Powered by blists - more mailing lists