On Wed, Dec 04, 2024 at 09:33:56AM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Tue, 3 Dec 2024 21:01:59 -0800 > "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Paul? > > > > Looks plausible to me, though I don't understand why the introduction > > of trace() doesn't permit removal of the corresponding current code. > > (Or did I miss a previous patch that did just that?) > > > > I removed the trace_*_rcuidle() code, but this file still used it. I didn't > realize that removing the trace_*_rcuidle() in this file would break other > architectures. > > This patch is a work around to not need to re-introduce the > trace_*_rcuidle() code. Works for me! Acked-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxx> Thanx, Paul
