From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757445AbcEEPkr (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 May 2016 11:40:47 -0400 Received: from mail-pa0-f51.google.com ([209.85.220.51]:36749 "EHLO mail-pa0-f51.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752377AbcEEPkq (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 May 2016 11:40:46 -0400 Date: Thu, 5 May 2016 08:40:41 -0700 From: Alexei Starovoitov To: Steven Rostedt Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar , Andrew Morton , Alexei Starovoitov Subject: Re: [for-next][PATCH 2/2] tracing: Use temp buffer when filtering events Message-ID: <20160505154038.GA73672@ast-mbp.thefacebook.com> References: <20160504135202.422290539@goodmis.org> <20160504135241.308454993@goodmis.org> <20160505152055.GA72567@ast-mbp.thefacebook.com> <20160505113251.71f2e60d@gandalf.local.home> <20160505113543.33f9a94b@gandalf.local.home> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160505113543.33f9a94b@gandalf.local.home> 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 Thu, May 05, 2016 at 11:35:43AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Thu, 5 May 2016 11:32:51 -0400 > Steven Rostedt wrote: > > > Think about it, what's the difference if the interrupt came in just > > before the trace or just after? It still came in the same location with > > respect to the normal flow of the code. The only difference is, where > > we recorded it. > > Also, if we used a temp buffer for each one, the same thing would > happen. The interrupt would be committed first before returning back to > the interrupted event. Perf does the same thing, but all the time. yeah. good point. there is no actual 'order' here. The whole thing looks good to me. Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov