* Jeremy Kerr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mathieu,
We need a marker_synchronize_unregister() before the end of exit() to
make sure every probe callers have exited the non preemptible section
and thus are not executing the probe code anymore.
Looks good - added to spufs.git.
that wont
Ingo,
that wont work very well as the patch relies on the new
marker_synchronize_unregister() facility.
d'oh, right you are. Should I leave this in your hands to merge?
Cheers,
Jeremy
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
* Jeremy Kerr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ingo,
that wont work very well as the patch relies on the new
marker_synchronize_unregister() facility.
d'oh, right you are. Should I leave this in your hands to merge?
would be nice if you could give your Acked-by for the sputrace bits,
then we
Ingo,
would be nice if you could give your Acked-by for the sputrace bits,
then we can merge it. It's a oneliner so it shouldnt cause merging
trouble in linux-next.
Sure!
Acked-by: Jeremy Kerr [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jeremy
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing
On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 11:11:47AM -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
We need a marker_synchronize_unregister() before the end of exit() to make
sure
every probe callers have exited the non preemptible section and thus are not
executing the probe code anymore.
Looks good.
We need a marker_synchronize_unregister() before the end of exit() to make sure
every probe callers have exited the non preemptible section and thus are not
executing the probe code anymore.
Signed-off-by: Mathieu Desnoyers [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CC: Ingo Molnar [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CC: Jeremy Kerr
Mathieu,
We need a marker_synchronize_unregister() before the end of exit() to
make sure every probe callers have exited the non preemptible section
and thus are not executing the probe code anymore.
Looks good - added to spufs.git.
Cheers,
Jeremy
