Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 6 Nov 2015 13:37:48 -0800 | Subject | Re: [GIT PULL] tracing: Updates for 4.4 | From | Linus Torvalds <> |
| |
On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 6:10 AM, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote: > > Most of the changes are clean ups and small fixes. Some of them have > stable tags to them. I searched through my INBOX just as the merge window > opened and found lots of patches to pull. I ran them through all my tests > and they were in linux-next for a few days.
Clearly they got zero actual testing, though.
I get several very big and ugly warnings about scheduler tracing:
kernel/trace/trace_events.c: In function ‘__ftrace_clear_event_pids’: kernel/trace/trace_events.c:579:32: warning: passing argument 1 of ‘unregister_trace_sched_switch’ from incompatible pointer type [-Wincompatible-pointer-types] unregister_trace_sched_switch(event_filter_pid_sched_switch_probe_pre, tr); ^ In file included from kernel/trace/trace_events.c:25:0: include/trace/events/sched.h:124:1095: note: expected ‘void (*)(void *, bool, struct task_struct *, struct task_struct *) {aka void (*)(void *, _Bool, struct task_struct *, struct task_struct *)}’ but argument is of type ‘void (*)(void *, struct task_struct *, struct task_struct *)’
which clearly can't work, and is due to the new "bool preempt" argument in scheduler tracing.
That *should* have shown up in linux-next, and you *should* have been aware of it, and in turn let me know about it. Yes, yes, I notice these things on my own, but I also expect that maintainers look out for these things, especially when they were involved on both sides, so it shouldn't have taken them - and this me - by surprise.
But something clearly failed in that whole process.
This is why we do *not* do some last-minute "let's just look through my mailbox as the merge window is opening" crap.
I've done the merge, and I have it fixed up in my tree, but I'm annoyed enough that I'm considering just unpulling. You *knew* about this, because you are marked as having reviewed that commit c73464b1c843 ("sched/core: Fix trace_sched_switch()") that added the preempt argument.
So where did this all fail? Nobody ever looked at the warnings from linux-next? Or it wasn't even in linux-next long enough to really ever trigger?
I very much suspect that "look through my INBOX as the merge window opened" is the real problem here. That is *not* how the merge window works, and you damn well should know it.
Linus
| |