Re: [PATCH 1/1] trace: use the more accurate parameter.

[Frederic Weisbecker]

On Mon, Feb 09, 2009 at 07:30:04PM -0500, Wenji Huang wrote:
> Pass tsk to __update_max_tr instead of current to avoid latent hazard.
> 
> Impact: clean up
> 
> Signed-off-by: Wenji Huang <wenji.huang@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  kernel/trace/trace.c |    2 +-
>  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace.c b/kernel/trace/trace.c
> index 5b1e9a9..c1592f1 100644
> --- a/kernel/trace/trace.c
> +++ b/kernel/trace/trace.c
> @@ -335,7 +335,7 @@ __update_max_tr(struct trace_array *tr, struct task_struct *tsk, int cpu)
>  	data->rt_priority = tsk->rt_priority;
>  
>  	/* record this tasks comm */
> -	tracing_record_cmdline(current);
> +	tracing_record_cmdline(tsk);
>  }


Indeed. At this stage, tsk is the next task in the middle of a context
switch. So I guess current is right, but this is more proper to use tsk.

  
>  static void
> -- 
> 1.5.6
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/