On Mon, 26 Mar 2018 17:32:02 +0200 Daniel Borkmann <daniel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 03/26/2018 05:04 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > On Mon, 26 Mar 2018 10:28:03 +0200 > > Daniel Borkmann <daniel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > >>> tracepoint base kprobe+bpf tracepoint+bpf raw_tracepoint+bpf > >>> task_rename 1.1M 769K 947K 1.0M > >>> urandom_read 789K 697K 750K 755K > >> > >> Applied to bpf-next, thanks Alexei! > > > > Please wait till you have the proper acks. Some of this affects > > tracing. > > Ok, I thought time up to v5 was long enough. Anyway, in case there are > objections I can still toss out the series from bpf-next tree worst case > should e.g. follow-up fixups not be appropriate. Yeah, I've been traveling a bit which slowed down my review process (trying to catch up). My main concern is with patch 6, as there are external users of those functions. Although, we generally don't cater to out of tree code, we play nice with LTTng, and I don't want to break it. I also should probably pull in the patches and run them through my tests to make sure they don't have any other side effects. -- Steve -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-api" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
