Good morning,
On Tue, Sep 01, 2020 at 11:28:55AM +0100, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
> On 08/19/2020 08:22 PM, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
> > Hi Suzuki,
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 08:29:31PM +0100, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
> > > If the specified/hinted sink is not reachable from a subset of the CPUs,
On 08/19/2020 08:22 PM, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
Hi Suzuki,
On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 08:29:31PM +0100, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
If the specified/hinted sink is not reachable from a subset of the CPUs,
we could end up unable to trace the event on those CPUs. This
is the best effort we could do until
Hi Suzuki,
On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 08:29:31PM +0100, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
> If the specified/hinted sink is not reachable from a subset of the CPUs,
> we could end up unable to trace the event on those CPUs. This
> is the best effort we could do until we support 1:1 configurations.
> Fail grace
Hi,
On 8/18/20 2:29 PM, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
If the specified/hinted sink is not reachable from a subset of the CPUs,
we could end up unable to trace the event on those CPUs. This
is the best effort we could do until we support 1:1 configurations.
Fail gracefully in such cases avoiding a WARN
If the specified/hinted sink is not reachable from a subset of the CPUs,
we could end up unable to trace the event on those CPUs. This
is the best effort we could do until we support 1:1 configurations.
Fail gracefully in such cases avoiding a WARN_ON, which can be easily
triggered by the user on c
5 matches
Mail list logo