(2013/06/21 3:31), Tom Zanussi wrote: > The comment on the soft disable 'disable' case of > __ftrace_event_enable_disable() states that the soft disable bit > should be cleared in that case, but currently only the soft mode bit > is actually cleared. > > This essentially leaves the standard non-soft-enable enable/disable > paths as the only way to clear the soft disable flag, but the soft > disable bit should also be cleared when removing a trigger with '!'.
Indeed, the soft-disabled flag may remain after the event itself disabled. However that soft-disabled flag will be cleared when the event is re-enabled. it seems no bad side-effect. Thus I doubt this patch is separately required. I guess this is required for adding new trigger flag, isn't it? :) Thank you, > > Also, the SOFT_DISABLED bit should never be set if SOFT_MODE is > cleared. > > This fixes the above discrepancies. > > Signed-off-by: Tom Zanussi <tom.zanu...@linux.intel.com> > --- > kernel/trace/trace_events.c | 2 ++ > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_events.c b/kernel/trace/trace_events.c > index ecb2609..f9738dc 100644 > --- a/kernel/trace/trace_events.c > +++ b/kernel/trace/trace_events.c > @@ -282,6 +282,8 @@ static int __ftrace_event_enable_disable(struct > ftrace_event_file *file, > /* If in SOFT_MODE, just set the SOFT_DISABLE_BIT */ > if (file->flags & FTRACE_EVENT_FL_SOFT_MODE) > set_bit(FTRACE_EVENT_FL_SOFT_DISABLED_BIT, > &file->flags); > + else > + clear_bit(FTRACE_EVENT_FL_SOFT_DISABLED_BIT, > &file->flags); > break; > case 1: > /* > -- Masami HIRAMATSU IT Management Research Dept. Linux Technology Center Hitachi, Ltd., Yokohama Research Laboratory E-mail: masami.hiramatsu...@hitachi.com -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
