Re: [for-next][PATCH 2/2] tracing: Use temp buffer when filtering events

From: Alexei Starovoitov
Date: Thu May 05 2016 - 11:40:49 EST

On Thu, May 05, 2016 at 11:35:43AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Thu, 5 May 2016 11:32:51 -0400
> Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Think about it, what's the difference if the interrupt came in just
> > before the trace or just after? It still came in the same location with
> > respect to the normal flow of the code. The only difference is, where
> > we recorded it.
> Also, if we used a temp buffer for each one, the same thing would
> happen. The interrupt would be committed first before returning back to
> the interrupted event. Perf does the same thing, but all the time.

yeah. good point. there is no actual 'order' here.
The whole thing looks good to me.
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@xxxxxxxxxx>