snip
+void list_modules(void *call_data)
+{
+ /* Enumerate loaded modules */
+ struct list_head *i;
+ struct module *mod;
+ unsigned long refcount = 0;
+
+ mutex_lock(&module_mutex);
+ list_for_each(i, &modules) {
+ mod = list_entry(i, struct module, list);
+#ifdef CONFIG_MODULE_UNLOAD
+ refcount = local_read(&mod->ref[0].count);
+#endif
+ __trace_mark(0, list_module, call_data,
+ "name %s state %d refcount %lu",
+ mod->name, mod->state, refcount);
+ }
+ mutex_unlock(&module_mutex);
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(list_modules);
+
/* Given an address, look for it in the module exception tables. */
const struct exception_table_entry *search_module_extables(unsigned long
addr)
{
What is the purpose of list_modules() in this patch? Seems outside the scope
of the patches' intent. I assume LTTng uses it for some purpose, but it's not
required to use the markers added by the patch.
Also, if list_modules() remains, the 0 should be removed from "__trace_mark(0, ..."
Mike Mason
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
