[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20241124222254.22235538@rorschach.local.home>
Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2024 22:22:54 -0500
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Michael
Jeanson <mjeanson@...icios.com>, Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>, "Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>, Ingo
Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>, Mark
Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>, Alexander Shishkin
<alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>, Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com>, bpf@...r.kernel.org, Joel
Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>, Jordan Rife <jrife@...gle.com>,
linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 4/5] tracing: Remove conditional locking from
__DO_TRACE()
On Sun, 24 Nov 2024 20:50:12 -0500
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com> wrote:
> Steven, do you want me to update the series with this change or
> should I leave the scoped_guard() as is considering the ongoing
> testing in linux-next ? We can always keep this minor change
> (scoped_guard -> guard) for a follow up patch.
Yeah, just send a patch on top. I haven't pushed to linux-next yet
though, because I found that it conflicts with my rust pull request
and I'm testing the merge of the two at the moment.
-- Steve
Powered by blists - more mailing lists