lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Nov]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [RFC 4/7] LTTng instrumentation kernel
    snip
    >
    > +void list_modules(void *call_data)
    > +{
    > + /* Enumerate loaded modules */
    > + struct list_head *i;
    > + struct module *mod;
    > + unsigned long refcount = 0;
    > +
    > + mutex_lock(&module_mutex);
    > + list_for_each(i, &modules) {
    > + mod = list_entry(i, struct module, list);
    > +#ifdef CONFIG_MODULE_UNLOAD
    > + refcount = local_read(&mod->ref[0].count);
    > +#endif
    > + __trace_mark(0, list_module, call_data,
    > + "name %s state %d refcount %lu",
    > + mod->name, mod->state, refcount);
    > + }
    > + mutex_unlock(&module_mutex);
    > +}
    > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(list_modules);
    > +
    > /* Given an address, look for it in the module exception tables. */
    > const struct exception_table_entry *search_module_extables(unsigned long
    > addr)
    > {

    What is the purpose of list_modules() in this patch? Seems outside the scope of the patches' intent. I assume LTTng uses it for some purpose, but it's not required to use the markers added by the patch.

    Also, if list_modules() remains, the 0 should be removed from "__trace_mark(0, ..."

    Mike Mason
    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2007-11-16 00:57    [W:0.048 / U:0.364 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site