Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Tue, 29 Nov 2011 11:07:42 +0100 | | From | Jiri Olsa <> | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 4/9] ftrace: Add enable/disable ftrace_ops control interface |
| |
On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 03:21:33PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > > > > @@ -311,6 +321,9 @@ static int __unregister_ftrace_function(struct ftrace_ops *ops) > > if (ret < 0) > > return ret; > > > > + if (ops->flags & FTRACE_OPS_FL_CONTROL) > > + jump_label_dec(&ftrace_ops_control); > > + > > if (ftrace_enabled) > > update_ftrace_function(); > > > > @@ -3577,8 +3590,14 @@ ftrace_ops_list_func(unsigned long ip, unsigned long parent_ip) > > preempt_disable_notrace(); > > op = rcu_dereference_raw(ftrace_ops_list); > > while (op != &ftrace_list_end) { > > + if (static_branch(&ftrace_ops_control)) > > Instead of doing a static_branch() here, which makes me really nervous, > because this is called in function trace context, which has some strict > rules of its own, and is probably prone to recursion, we could add > another "ops" similar to the global_ops. > > We could make a control_ops, and add all ops with the > FTRACE_OPS_FL_CONTROL flag set to it. And then this function will have > its own loop that it will check the disabled flag, for the ops > registered to it. > > This code doesn't need to be touched, we just add a layer of redirection > for control ops and it will solve the jump_label issue.
sounds good, I'll make the change
thanks, jirka
> > -- Steve > > > + if ((op->flags & FTRACE_OPS_FL_CONTROL) && > > + atomic_read(&op->disabled)) > > + goto next; > > + > > if (ftrace_ops_test(op, ip)) > > op->func(ip, parent_ip); > > + next: > > op = rcu_dereference_raw(op->next); > > }; > > preempt_enable_notrace(); > >
|  |