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    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans