Re: [PATCH] trace: irqsoff: Fix function tracing in preempt and preemptirqsoff tracers

Hi Steven, On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 9:44 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote: > This should fix the issue for you. This probably should be added to > stable as well (I'll add a tag). Thanks a lot for working on this. > > -- Steve > > From e79b49b73079d4320a6ad08eb91d3c92cfef6e6a Mon

Re: [PATCH] trace: irqsoff: Fix function tracing in preempt and preemptirqsoff tracers

Hi Steven, On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 9:44 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote: > This should fix the issue for you. This probably should be added to > stable as well (I'll add a tag). Thanks a lot for working on this. > > -- Steve > > From e79b49b73079d4320a6ad08eb91d3c92cfef6e6a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 >

Re: [PATCH] trace: irqsoff: Fix function tracing in preempt and preemptirqsoff tracers

On Sat, 12 Mar 2016 00:13:06 -0800 Joel Fernandes wrote: > All functions aren't traced in critical sections where preemption is disabled > and interrupts are enabled in preempt* tracers because current behavior is to > check if interrupts are disabled and if they are not,

Re: [PATCH] trace: irqsoff: Fix function tracing in preempt and preemptirqsoff tracers

On Sat, 12 Mar 2016 00:13:06 -0800 Joel Fernandes wrote: > All functions aren't traced in critical sections where preemption is disabled > and interrupts are enabled in preempt* tracers because current behavior is to > check if interrupts are disabled and if they are not, then we don't trace >

Re: [PATCH] trace: irqsoff: Fix function tracing in preempt and preemptirqsoff tracers

This should fix the issue for you. This probably should be added to stable as well (I'll add a tag). -- Steve >From e79b49b73079d4320a6ad08eb91d3c92cfef6e6a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: "Steven Rostedt (Red Hat)" Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2016 12:27:43 -0400 Subject: [PATCH]

Re: [PATCH] trace: irqsoff: Fix function tracing in preempt and preemptirqsoff tracers

This should fix the issue for you. This probably should be added to stable as well (I'll add a tag). -- Steve >From e79b49b73079d4320a6ad08eb91d3c92cfef6e6a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: "Steven Rostedt (Red Hat)" Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2016 12:27:43 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] tracing: Have

[PATCH] trace: irqsoff: Fix function tracing in preempt and preemptirqsoff tracers

All functions aren't traced in critical sections where preemption is disabled and interrupts are enabled in preempt* tracers because current behavior is to check if interrupts are disabled and if they are not, then we don't trace these functions. So here we do the correct checks depending on

[PATCH] trace: irqsoff: Fix function tracing in preempt and preemptirqsoff tracers

All functions aren't traced in critical sections where preemption is disabled and interrupts are enabled in preempt* tracers because current behavior is to check if interrupts are disabled and if they are not, then we don't trace these functions. So here we do the correct checks depending on

[PATCH] trace: irqsoff: Fix function tracing in preempt and preemptirqsoff tracers

All functions aren't traced in critical sections where preemption is disabled and interrupts are enabled in preempt* tracers because current behavior is to check if interrupts are disabled and if they are not, then we don't trace these functions. So here we do the correct checks depending on

[PATCH] trace: irqsoff: Fix function tracing in preempt and preemptirqsoff tracers

All functions aren't traced in critical sections where preemption is disabled and interrupts are enabled in preempt* tracers because current behavior is to check if interrupts are disabled and if they are not, then we don't trace these functions. So here we do the correct checks depending on