Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756753AbYLDNGv (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Dec 2008 08:06:51 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753929AbYLDNG0 (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Dec 2008 08:06:26 -0500 Received: from out02.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.232]:57502 "EHLO out02.mta.xmission.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751944AbYLDNGY (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Dec 2008 08:06:24 -0500 From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Andrew Morton , Steven Rostedt , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Frederic Weisbecker , Peter Zijlstra , Dave Hansen , containers@lists.osdl.org, Sukadev Bhattiprolu , "Serge E. Hallyn" , Steven Rostedt Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] ftrace: add ability to only trace swapper tasks References: <20081204052638.425740534@goodmis.org> <20081204052735.362609481@goodmis.org> <20081204001803.598063f5.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20081204091023.GJ32594@elte.hu> Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2008 04:59:04 -0800 In-Reply-To: <20081204091023.GJ32594@elte.hu> (Ingo Molnar's message of "Thu, 4 Dec 2008 10:10:23 +0100") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-XM-SPF: eid=;;;mid=;;;hst=mx04.mta.xmission.com;;;ip=24.130.11.59;;;frm=ebiederm@xmission.com;;;spf=neutral X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 24.130.11.59 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: too long (recipient list exceeded maximum allowed size of 128 bytes) X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: ebiederm@xmission.com X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Thu, 07 Dec 2006 04:40:56 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on mx04.mta.xmission.com); Unknown failure Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 893 Lines: 25 Ingo Molnar writes: > * Andrew Morton wrote: > >> > Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt >> >> What does this patch actually do? Is swapper currently excluded from >> tracing for undisclosed reasons and this patch permits it to be traced? >> If so, why was swapper thus excluded? Or am I totally off track? > >> > +static struct pid * const ftrace_swapper_pid = (struct pid *)1; >> >> eh? > > all side-effects of getting rid of the integer based PID namespace and > replacing them with struct pid pointers. Thanks for asking Andrew it looks like an unnecessary side effect. Eric -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/