From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1751471AbcCKSPV (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Fri, 11 Mar 2016 13:15:21 -0500
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:52178 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1750888AbcCKSPQ (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 11 Mar 2016 13:15:16 -0500
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2016 19:15:06 +0100
From: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>
To: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>
Cc: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] ftrace: Make ftrace_hash_rec_enable return update
 bool
Message-ID: <20160311181506.GB1060@krava.redhat.com>
References: <1457556405-27717-1-git-send-email-jolsa@kernel.org>
 <1457556405-27717-5-git-send-email-jolsa@kernel.org>
 <20160311142800.GC25533@danjae.kornet>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20160311142800.GC25533@danjae.kornet>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 11:28:00PM +0900, Namhyung Kim wrote:

SNIP

> > @@ -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()?

I dont think so, 1 is to update calls (FTRACE_UPDATE_CALLS)
check ftrace_modify_all_code:

        if (command & FTRACE_UPDATE_CALLS)
                ftrace_replace_code(1);
        else if (command & FTRACE_DISABLE_CALLS)
                ftrace_replace_code(0);

both ftrace_startup, ftrace_shutdown use FTRACE_UPDATE_CALLS

you'd use 0 only to disable all, check ftrace_check_record comments:

        /*
         * If we are updating calls:
         *
         *   If the record has a ref count, then we need to enable it
         *   because someone is using it.
         *
         *   Otherwise we make sure its disabled.
         *
         * If we are disabling calls, then disable all records that
         * are enabled.
         */
        if (enable && ftrace_rec_count(rec))
                flag = FTRACE_FL_ENABLED;


used by ftrace_shutdown_sysctl

thanks,
jirka