On Fri 04-08-23 09:06:07, Doug Anderson wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Aug 4, 2023 at 8:02 AM Michal Hocko wrote:
> >
> > > > It would have been slightly safer to modify
> > > > arch_trigger_cpumask_backtrace
> > > > by switching arguments so that some leftovers are captured easier.
> > >
> > > I'm no
Hi,
On Fri, Aug 4, 2023 at 8:02 AM Michal Hocko wrote:
>
> > > It would have been slightly safer to modify arch_trigger_cpumask_backtrace
> > > by switching arguments so that some leftovers are captured easier.
> >
> > I'm not sure I understand. Oh, you're saying make the prototype of
> > arch_tr
On Fri 04-08-23 06:56:51, Doug Anderson wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Aug 4, 2023 at 12:50 AM Michal Hocko wrote:
> >
> > On Thu 03-08-23 16:07:57, Douglas Anderson wrote:
> > > The APIs that allow backtracing across CPUs have always had a way to
> > > exclude the current CPU. This convenience means c
Hi,
On Fri, Aug 4, 2023 at 12:50 AM Michal Hocko wrote:
>
> On Thu 03-08-23 16:07:57, Douglas Anderson wrote:
> > The APIs that allow backtracing across CPUs have always had a way to
> > exclude the current CPU. This convenience means callers didn't need to
> > find a place to allocate a CPU mask
On Thu 03-08-23 16:07:57, Douglas Anderson wrote:
> The APIs that allow backtracing across CPUs have always had a way to
> exclude the current CPU. This convenience means callers didn't need to
> find a place to allocate a CPU mask just to handle the common case.
>
> Let's extend the API to take a
