RE: [PATCH] ftrace: As disabling interrupts is costly and write_lock variant of tasklist_lock is not held from interrupt context it is not necessary to disable interrupts.

From	"N, Soumya P" <soumya.p.n@hpe.com>
Newsgroups	linux.kernel
Subject	RE: [PATCH] ftrace: As disabling interrupts is costly and write_lock variant of tasklist_lock is not held from interrupt context it is not necessary to disable interrupts.
Date	2016-05-19 16:30 +0200
Message-ID	<rAwEy-vI-45@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References	<rAfNn-6pu-23@gated-at.bofh.it> <rAfNn-6pu-21@gated-at.bofh.it> <rAsrg-6ir-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <rAw1Q-gk-9@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization	linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw

Hi Steve,

Thanks for the explanation.
I will take care of your comments and send v2 of the same patch.

Thanks,
Soumya.
-----Original Message-----
From: Steven Rostedt [mailto:rostedt@goodmis.org] 
Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2016 6:41 PM
To: N, Soumya P <soumya.p.n@hpe.com>
Cc: mingo@redhat.com; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ftrace: As disabling interrupts is costly and write_lock variant of tasklist_lock is not held from interrupt context it is not necessary to disable interrupts.

On Thu, 19 May 2016 08:53:17 +0000
"N, Soumya P" <soumya.p.n@hpe.com> wrote:

> Hi Steve,
> 
> Could you please explain what this error means?
> Is it related to length of subject?
> I have run checkpatch.pl on patch and didn't show any error.
> 
> Thanks,
> Soumya.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Steven Rostedt [mailto:rostedt@goodmis.org]
> Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2016 1:25 AM
> To: N, Soumya P <soumya.p.n@hpe.com>
> Cc: mingo@redhat.com; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] ftrace: As disabling interrupts is costly and write_lock variant of tasklist_lock is not held from interrupt context it is not necessary to disable interrupts.
> 
> 
> -ERUNONSUBJECT

A subject (and this includes normal net etiquette as well) should be a short description of what the email (or patch) is about, preferably under 80 characters. What you supplied is an abstract.

it should have been something as simple as:

 ftrace: Don't disable interrupts when taking read_lock() for graph tracer

And don't rely on checkpatch.pl. Read Documentation/SubmittingPatches in the kernel proper.

-- Steve

Thread

Re: [PATCH] ftrace: As disabling interrupts is costly and  write_lock variant of tasklist_lock is not held from interrupt context it  is not necessary to disable interrupts. Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> - 2016-05-18 22:00 +0200
  RE: [PATCH] ftrace: As disabling interrupts is costly and write_lock  variant of tasklist_lock is not held from interrupt context it is not  necessary to disable interrupts. "N, Soumya P" <soumya.p.n@hpe.com> - 2016-05-19 11:30 +0200
    Re: [PATCH] ftrace: As disabling interrupts is costly and  write_lock variant of tasklist_lock is not held from interrupt context it  is not necessary to disable interrupts. Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> - 2016-05-19 15:20 +0200
      Re: [PATCH] ftrace: As disabling interrupts is costly and  write_lock variant of tasklist_lock is not held from interrupt context it  is not necessary to disable interrupts. Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> - 2016-05-19 16:00 +0200
      RE: [PATCH] ftrace: As disabling interrupts is costly and write_lock  variant of tasklist_lock is not held from interrupt context it is not  necessary to disable interrupts. "N, Soumya P" <soumya.p.n@hpe.com> - 2016-05-19 16:30 +0200
        Re: [PATCH] ftrace: As disabling interrupts is costly and  write_lock variant of tasklist_lock is not held from interrupt context it  is not necessary to disable interrupts. Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> - 2016-05-20 19:30 +0200
          RE: [PATCH] ftrace: As disabling interrupts is costly and write_lock  variant of tasklist_lock is not held from interrupt context it is not  necessary to disable interrupts. "N, Soumya P" <soumya.p.n@hpe.com> - 2016-05-21 20:50 +0200

csiph-web