Re: [PATCH 0/5 v2] Binary ftrace_printk

[Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>]

* Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 05, 2009 at 05:53:58AM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > 
> > This new iteration addresses Steven's reviews.
> > Notably:
> > 
> > - only build the ftrace_printk format section if CONFIG_TRACING is set
> > - be scheduler tracing safe (don't use preempt_enable directly from
> >   ftrace_printk to avoid tracing recursion)
> > - fix a loss of format string when a module is unloaded. Since we can loose
> >   it on the ring-buffer if it is in overwrite mode, we don't keep track
> >   of the format given by the modules to free them. We just copy their
> >   ftrace_printk string format forever. Note that it is safe against duplicate
> >   strings since we verify if the string is already present in our list before
> >   allocating a new one.
> > 
> > ---
> 
> 
> tip:master has seen some changes concerning the tracing bits 
> since this patchset submission, notably the movement of 
> ftrace_printk to include/kernel.h
> 
> These patches probably won't anymore apply properly. Do you 
> want me to rebase them against latest tip/master?

Yeah, please do. (Would there be a way for you to submit via 
tools that preserve the email-threading of the patches? Right 
now your mails come in separate threads each.)

> Or perhaps you prefer to wait for a Acked-by from Linus or 
> Andrew?

The current lineup looks pretty good to me.

Patch #1 is what modifies lib/vsprintf.c and unless Linus or 
Andrew objects i plan to put that into tip:core/printk so that 
it's not embedded in the tracing tree and sent upstream 
separately.

Then i'll merge that branch into the tracing tree and apply 
patches #2...#5. So as long as you send against tip:master (i.e. 
against the latest tracing bits) i'll be able to sort it out 
neatly.

	Ingo