Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 13 Mar 2014 18:22:52 +0000 (UTC) | From | Mathieu Desnoyers <> | Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH v2] Tracepoint: register/unregister struct tracepoint |
| |
----- Original Message ----- > From: "Steven Rostedt" <rostedt@goodmis.org> > To: "Mathieu Desnoyers" <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> > Cc: "Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@redhat.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Ingo Molnar" <mingo@kernel.org>, "Frederic > Weisbecker" <fweisbec@gmail.com>, "Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, "Johannes Berg" > <johannes.berg@intel.com> > Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2014 2:17:53 PM > Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2] Tracepoint: register/unregister struct tracepoint > > On Thu, 2014-03-13 at 16:54 +0000, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote: > > > The other use-case is if the tracer has a module coming/going notifier > > tracking the module's tracepoint callsites. The going notifier should > > be run before the tracepoint.c going notifier. A notifier with negative > > priority should have this effect, since the tracepoint.c notifier has > > priority 0. > > > > The tracepoint should change to have two different notifiers that > represent one for coming and one for going (as ftrace does). The coming > one should have a priority of 0 (or INT_MIN (all other notifiers > dependent on this should have > 0) > > The going notifier should have a INT_MAX to run after all other > tracepoint notifiers. (see kernel/trace/ftrace.c ftrace_module_enter_nb > and ftrace_module_exit_nb)
OK, I'll spin a v4 with this change.
Thanks!
Mathieu
> > -- Steve > > >
-- Mathieu Desnoyers EfficiOS Inc. http://www.efficios.com
| |