>>> On 13.05.19 at 12:42, wrote:
> On 5/8/19 2:07 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> TBD: I wonder whether the function shouldn't gain an early tb_init_done
>> check, like many other trace_*() have.
>
> Yeah, avoiding these memcopies when tracing is not enabled seems like a
> good thing.
I've taken
On 5/8/19 2:07 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
> Dynamically allocated CPU mask objects may be smaller than cpumask_t, so
> copying has to be restricted to the actual allocation size. This is
> particulary important since the function doesn't bail early when tracing
> is not active, so even production
On Wed, May 08, 2019 at 07:07:21AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> Dynamically allocated CPU mask objects may be smaller than cpumask_t, so
> copying has to be restricted to the actual allocation size. This is
> particulary important since the function doesn't bail early when tracing
> is not active,
