Re: linux-next: Tree for Feb 4

Dave Hansen
2015-02-05T18:11:35Z

On 02/05/2015 10:08 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> --- a/include/trace/events/tlb.h
> +++ b/include/trace/events/tlb.h
> @@ -13,11 +13,13 @@
> { TLB_LOCAL_SHOOTDOWN, "local shootdown" }, \
> { TLB_LOCAL_MM_SHOOTDOWN, "local mm shootdown" }
>
> -TRACE_EVENT(tlb_flush,
> +TRACE_EVENT_CONDITION(tlb_flush,
>
> TP_PROTO(int reason, unsigned long pages),
> TP_ARGS(reason, pages),
>
> + TP_CONDITION(cpu_online(smp_processor_id())),

That's a pretty reasonable fix, although it would be nice if the
debugging was easier to hit. Did I actually need to be
onlining/offlining CPUs to hit the splat that Sedat was reporting?