On Thu, 22 Sep 2016 22:45:14 -0400 Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Sep 2016 10:04:31 +0800
> Jisheng Zhang wrote:
>
> > Hi Thomas,
> >
> > On Thu, 22 Sep 2016 15:58:03 +0200 Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, 22 Sep 2016, Jisheng Zhang wrote:
> > >
> > > > Currently ti-32k can
On Fri, 23 Sep 2016 10:04:31 +0800
Jisheng Zhang wrote:
> Hi Thomas,
>
> On Thu, 22 Sep 2016 15:58:03 +0200 Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 22 Sep 2016, Jisheng Zhang wrote:
> >
> > > Currently ti-32k can be used as a scheduler clock. We properly marked
> > > omap_32k_read_sched_clock()
Hi Thomas,
On Thu, 22 Sep 2016 15:58:03 +0200 Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Sep 2016, Jisheng Zhang wrote:
>
> > Currently ti-32k can be used as a scheduler clock. We properly marked
> > omap_32k_read_sched_clock() as notrace but we then call another
> > function ti_32k_read_cycles() that
On Thu, 22 Sep 2016 15:58:03 +0200 (CEST)
Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Sep 2016, Jisheng Zhang wrote:
>
> > Currently ti-32k can be used as a scheduler clock. We properly marked
> > omap_32k_read_sched_clock() as notrace but we then call another
> > function ti_32k_read_cycles() that _was
On Thu, 22 Sep 2016, Jisheng Zhang wrote:
> Currently ti-32k can be used as a scheduler clock. We properly marked
> omap_32k_read_sched_clock() as notrace but we then call another
> function ti_32k_read_cycles() that _wasn't_ notrace.
>
> Having a traceable function in the sched_clock() path lead
Currently ti-32k can be used as a scheduler clock. We properly marked
omap_32k_read_sched_clock() as notrace but we then call another
function ti_32k_read_cycles() that _wasn't_ notrace.
Having a traceable function in the sched_clock() path leads to a
recursion within ftrace and a kernel crash.
F
6 matches
Mail list logo