From 361943ad0ba3f16e66859e30a408915e008ba91e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Steven Rostedt Date: Mon, 12 May 2008 21:20:44 +0200 Subject: ftrace: irqs off smp_processor_id() fix The irqsoff function tracer did a __get_cpu_var to determine if it should trace the function or not. The problem is that __get_cpu_var can preempt between getting the CPU and reading the cpu variable. This means that the cpu variable that is being read is not from the cpu being run on. At worst, this can give a false positive, where we trace the function when we should not. It will never give a false negative since we only want to trace when interrupts are disabled and we never preempt when they are. This fix adds a check after reading the irq flags to only trace if the interrupts are actually disabled. It also changes the reading of the cpu variable to use a raw_smp_processor_id since we now don't care if we preempt. We still catch that fact. Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner --- kernel/trace/trace_irqsoff.c | 13 +++++++++++-- 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) (limited to 'kernel/trace/trace_irqsoff.c') diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_irqsoff.c b/kernel/trace/trace_irqsoff.c index 8b1231633dc5..bd3f88198308 100644 --- a/kernel/trace/trace_irqsoff.c +++ b/kernel/trace/trace_irqsoff.c @@ -74,12 +74,21 @@ irqsoff_tracer_call(unsigned long ip, unsigned long parent_ip) long disabled; int cpu; - if (likely(!__get_cpu_var(tracing_cpu))) + /* + * Does not matter if we preempt. We test the flags + * afterward, to see if irqs are disabled or not. + * If we preempt and get a false positive, the flags + * test will fail. + */ + cpu = raw_smp_processor_id(); + if (likely(!per_cpu(tracing_cpu, cpu))) return; local_save_flags(flags); + /* slight chance to get a false positive on tracing_cpu */ + if (!irqs_disabled_flags(flags)) + return; - cpu = raw_smp_processor_id(); data = tr->data[cpu]; disabled = atomic_inc_return(&data->disabled); -- cgit v1.2.3