linux-next: manual merge of the percpu tree with the tip tree

[Stephen Rothwell]

Hi all,

Today's linux-next merge of the percpu tree got a conflict in
include/linux/ftrace_event.h, include/trace/ftrace.h,
kernel/trace/trace_kprobe.c, kernel/trace/trace_syscalls.c and
kernel/trace/trace_event_profile.c between commit
430ad5a600a83956749307b13257c464c3826b55 ("perf: Factorize trace events
raw sample buffer operations") from the tip tree and commit
eeb721be6bc03fe37755e69ab5c3ba2fe9897fd9 ("percpu: add __percpu sparse
annotations to trace") from the percpu tree.

I attempted to fix them up (see below) but someone should check the
result carefully. (The apparently unchanged files below used the tip
tree versions.)

--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell s...@canb.auug.org.au

diff --cc include/linux/ftrace_event.h
index 6b7c444,72fccdd..0000000
--- a/include/linux/ftrace_event.h
+++ b/include/linux/ftrace_event.h
diff --cc include/trace/ftrace.h
index fb2c5bd,210d421..0000000
--- a/include/trace/ftrace.h
+++ b/include/trace/ftrace.h
diff --cc kernel/trace/trace_event_profile.c
index f0d6930,4b16312..0000000
--- a/kernel/trace/trace_event_profile.c
+++ b/kernel/trace/trace_event_profile.c
@@@ -10,8 -9,11 +10,8 @@@
#include "trace.h"


- static char *perf_trace_buf;
- static char *perf_trace_buf_nmi;
-char __percpu *perf_trace_buf;
-EXPORT_PER_CPU_SYMBOL_GPL(perf_trace_buf);
-
-char __percpu *perf_trace_buf_nmi;
-EXPORT_PER_CPU_SYMBOL_GPL(perf_trace_buf_nmi);
++static char __percpu *perf_trace_buf;
++static char __percpu *perf_trace_buf_nmi;

typedef typeof(char [FTRACE_MAX_PROFILE_SIZE]) perf_trace_t ;

@@@ -118,47 -120,3 +118,48 @@@ void ftrace_profile_disable(int event_i
}
mutex_unlock(&event_mutex);
}
+
+__kprobes void *ftrace_perf_buf_prepare(int size, unsigned short type,
+ int *rctxp, unsigned long *irq_flags)
+{
+ struct trace_entry *entry;
- char *trace_buf, *raw_data;
++ char __percpu *trace_buf;
++ char *raw_data;
+ int pc, cpu;
+
+ pc = preempt_count();
+
+ /* Protect the per cpu buffer, begin the rcu read side */
+ local_irq_save(*irq_flags);
+
+ *rctxp = perf_swevent_get_recursion_context();
+ if (*rctxp < 0)
+ goto err_recursion;
+
+ cpu = smp_processor_id();
+
+ if (in_nmi())
+ trace_buf = rcu_dereference(perf_trace_buf_nmi);
+ else
+ trace_buf = rcu_dereference(perf_trace_buf);
+
+ if (!trace_buf)
+ goto err;
+
+ raw_data = per_cpu_ptr(trace_buf, cpu);
+
+ /* zero the dead bytes from align to not leak stack to user */
+ *(u64 *)(&raw_data[size - sizeof(u64)]) = 0ULL;
+
+ entry = (struct trace_entry *)raw_data;
+ tracing_generic_entry_update(entry, *irq_flags, pc);
+ entry->type = type;
+
+ return raw_data;
+err:
+ perf_swevent_put_recursion_context(*rctxp);
+err_recursion:
+ local_irq_restore(*irq_flags);
+ return NULL;
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(ftrace_perf_buf_prepare);
diff --cc kernel/trace/trace_kprobe.c
index 9d085d3,4567950..0000000
--- a/kernel/trace/trace_kprobe.c
+++ b/kernel/trace/trace_kprobe.c
diff --cc kernel/trace/trace_syscalls.c
index 6cce6a8,9f7de51..0000000
--- a/kernel/trace/trace_syscalls.c
+++ b/kernel/trace/trace_syscalls.c
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majo...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[Frederic Weisbecker]

On Wed, Feb 03, 2010 at 04:38:22PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the percpu tree got a conflict in
> include/linux/ftrace_event.h, include/trace/ftrace.h,
> kernel/trace/trace_kprobe.c, kernel/trace/trace_syscalls.c and
> kernel/trace/trace_event_profile.c between commit
> 430ad5a600a83956749307b13257c464c3826b55 ("perf: Factorize trace events
> raw sample buffer operations") from the tip tree and commit
> eeb721be6bc03fe37755e69ab5c3ba2fe9897fd9 ("percpu: add __percpu sparse
> annotations to trace") from the percpu tree.
>
> I attempted to fix them up (see below) but someone should check the
> result carefully. (The apparently unchanged files below used the tip
> tree versions.)
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Stephen Rothwell s...@canb.auug.org.au

I'm not very used to review patches on patches :)

But yeah that looks good to me.

Thanks!