Re: [PATCH 05/05] Linux Kernel Markers, non optimised architectures

[Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>]

Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:

> +#define MARK(name, format, args...) \
> +	do { \
> +		static marker_probe_func *__mark_call_##name = \
> +					__mark_empty_function; \
> +		volatile static char __marker_enable_##name = 0; \
> +		static const struct __mark_marker_c __mark_c_##name \
> +			__attribute__((section(".markers.c"))) = \
> +			{ #name, &__mark_call_##name, format } ; \
> +		static const struct __mark_marker __mark_##name \
> +			__attribute__((section(".markers"))) = \
> +			{ &__mark_c_##name, &__marker_enable_##name } ; \
> +		asm volatile ( "" : : "i" (&__mark_##name)); \
> +		__mark_check_format(format, ## args); \
> +		if (unlikely(__marker_enable_##name)) { \
> +			preempt_disable(); \
> +			(*__mark_call_##name)(format, ## args); \
> +			preempt_enable_no_resched(); \

Why not just preempt_enable() here?

--
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com 
-
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/