On 22.08.12 16:03:44, Junxiao Bi wrote: > On 08/22/2012 03:07 PM, Robert Richter wrote: > > On 22.08.12 10:21:07, Junxiao Bi wrote:
> >> arch/x86/oprofile/backtrace.c | 4 ++-- > >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > We should implement the perf version here, which does a: > > > > int type = in_nmi() ? KM_NMI : KM_IRQ0; > > > > See arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event.c. > KM_NMI seems OK for this since this function is only called by oprofile > backtrace which is in nmi context. Yes, should be safe. But I don't want both implementation diverge. -Robert -- Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. Operating System Research Center -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
