From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756218AbcCUN3i (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Mar 2016 09:29:38 -0400 Received: from smtprelay0023.hostedemail.com ([216.40.44.23]:36156 "EHLO smtprelay.hostedemail.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755596AbcCUN3g (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Mar 2016 09:29:36 -0400 X-Session-Marker: 726F737465647440676F6F646D69732E6F7267 X-Spam-Summary: 2,0,0,,d41d8cd98f00b204,rostedt@goodmis.org,:::::::,RULES_HIT:41:355:379:541:599:800:960:973:988:989:1260:1277:1311:1313:1314:1345:1359:1437:1515:1516:1518:1534:1537:1566:1593:1594:1711:1714:1730:1747:1777:1792:2393:2553:2559:2562:3138:3139:3140:3141:3142:3622:3865:3867:3872:5007:6261:7875:10004:10400:10848:10967:11026:11232:11658:11914:12043:12438:12517:12519:12740:13069:13311:13357:13439:14181:14659:14721:21080:30012:30054:30070:30090:30091,0,RBL:none,CacheIP:none,Bayesian:0.5,0.5,0.5,Netcheck:none,DomainCache:0,MSF:not bulk,SPF:fn,MSBL:0,DNSBL:none,Custom_rules:0:0:0,LFtime:2,LUA_SUMMARY:none X-HE-Tag: heart11_8dcbc80bc540f X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 1336 Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2016 09:29:32 -0400 From: Steven Rostedt To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: LKML , Ingo Molnar , Thomas Gleixner Subject: Re: [PATCH] sched: Add preempt checks in preempt_schedule() code Message-ID: <20160321092932.2d1dce5a@gandalf.local.home> In-Reply-To: <20160321092746.GR6344@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <20160318130602.25f6c9cd@gandalf.local.home> <20160321092746.GR6344@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.13.2 (GTK+ 2.24.29; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 21 Mar 2016 10:27:46 +0100 Peter Zijlstra wrote: > So no real objection to the patch except this naming. > > It doesn't 'check', it does preempt-latency tracing. So could we rename > this to something like: > > preempt_{dis,en}able_latency() > > or somesuch? What about: preempt_enable_trace() or preempt_enable_trace_test()? -- Steve