From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932332AbcCKO3e (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 Mar 2016 09:29:34 -0500 Received: from mail-pa0-f68.google.com ([209.85.220.68]:34031 "EHLO mail-pa0-f68.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932102AbcCKO3Z (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 Mar 2016 09:29:25 -0500 Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2016 23:28:00 +0900 From: Namhyung Kim To: Jiri Olsa Cc: Steven Rostedt , lkml , Ingo Molnar , Peter Zijlstra , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] ftrace: Make ftrace_hash_rec_enable return update bool Message-ID: <20160311142800.GC25533@danjae.kornet> References: <1457556405-27717-1-git-send-email-jolsa@kernel.org> <1457556405-27717-5-git-send-email-jolsa@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1457556405-27717-5-git-send-email-jolsa@kernel.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Mar 09, 2016 at 09:46:44PM +0100, Jiri Olsa wrote: > Change __ftrace_hash_rec_update to return true in case > we need to update dynamic ftrace call records. It return > false in case no update is needed. > > Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa > --- > kernel/trace/ftrace.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++---------- > 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/kernel/trace/ftrace.c b/kernel/trace/ftrace.c > index eca592f977b2..123dddc660e9 100644 > --- a/kernel/trace/ftrace.c > +++ b/kernel/trace/ftrace.c > @@ -1610,7 +1610,7 @@ static bool test_rec_ops_needs_regs(struct dyn_ftrace *rec) > return keep_regs; > } > > -static void __ftrace_hash_rec_update(struct ftrace_ops *ops, > +static bool __ftrace_hash_rec_update(struct ftrace_ops *ops, > int filter_hash, > bool inc) > { > @@ -1618,12 +1618,13 @@ static void __ftrace_hash_rec_update(struct ftrace_ops *ops, > struct ftrace_hash *other_hash; > struct ftrace_page *pg; > struct dyn_ftrace *rec; > + bool update = false; > int count = 0; > int all = 0; > > /* Only update if the ops has been registered */ > if (!(ops->flags & FTRACE_OPS_FL_ENABLED)) > - return; > + return false; > > /* > * In the filter_hash case: > @@ -1650,7 +1651,7 @@ static void __ftrace_hash_rec_update(struct ftrace_ops *ops, > * then there's nothing to do. > */ > if (ftrace_hash_empty(hash)) > - return; > + return false; > } > > do_for_each_ftrace_rec(pg, rec) { > @@ -1694,7 +1695,7 @@ static void __ftrace_hash_rec_update(struct ftrace_ops *ops, > if (inc) { > rec->flags++; > if (FTRACE_WARN_ON(ftrace_rec_count(rec) == FTRACE_REF_MAX)) > - return; > + return false; > > /* > * If there's only a single callback registered to a > @@ -1720,7 +1721,7 @@ static void __ftrace_hash_rec_update(struct ftrace_ops *ops, > rec->flags |= FTRACE_FL_REGS; > } else { > if (FTRACE_WARN_ON(ftrace_rec_count(rec) == 0)) > - return; > + return false; > rec->flags--; > > /* > @@ -1753,22 +1754,27 @@ static void __ftrace_hash_rec_update(struct ftrace_ops *ops, > */ > } > count++; > + > + update |= ftrace_test_record(rec, 1) != FTRACE_UPDATE_IGNORE; Shouldn't it use 'inc' instead of 1 for the second argument of the ftrace_test_record()? Thanks, Namhyung > + > /* Shortcut, if we handled all records, we are done. */ > if (!all && count == hash->count) > - return; > + return update; > } while_for_each_ftrace_rec(); > + > + return update; > } > > -static void ftrace_hash_rec_disable(struct ftrace_ops *ops, > +static bool ftrace_hash_rec_disable(struct ftrace_ops *ops, > int filter_hash) > { > - __ftrace_hash_rec_update(ops, filter_hash, 0); > + return __ftrace_hash_rec_update(ops, filter_hash, 0); > } > > -static void ftrace_hash_rec_enable(struct ftrace_ops *ops, > +static bool ftrace_hash_rec_enable(struct ftrace_ops *ops, > int filter_hash) > { > - __ftrace_hash_rec_update(ops, filter_hash, 1); > + return __ftrace_hash_rec_update(ops, filter_hash, 1); > } > > static void ftrace_hash_rec_update_modify(struct ftrace_ops *ops, > -- > 2.4.3 >