On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 01:24:46PM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
Hi Peter,
On Thu, 12 Jan 2023 20:43:49 +0100
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Robot reported that trace_hardirqs_{on,off}() tickle the forbidden
_rcuidle() tracepoint through local_irq_{en,dis}able().
For 'sane' configs, these calls will only happen with RCU enabled and
as such can use the regular tracepoint. This also means it's possible
to trace them from NMI context again.
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
The code looks good to me. I just have a question about comment.
---
kernel/trace/trace_preemptirq.c | 21 +++++++++++++--------
1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
--- a/kernel/trace/trace_preemptirq.c
+++ b/kernel/trace/trace_preemptirq.c
@@ -20,6 +20,15 @@
static DEFINE_PER_CPU(int, tracing_irq_cpu);
/*
+ * ...
Is this intended? Wouldn't you leave any comment here?
I indeed forgot to write the comment before posting, my bad :/ Ingo fixed
it up when he applied.
