p71924506
/
linux_old1
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Projects Releases Wiki Activity

ftrace/documentation: Fix RST C code blocks 

Some C code in the ftrace-users.rst document is missing RST C block
annotation, which has to be added.

Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20201116173502.392a769c@canb.auug.org.au

Acked-by: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
Reported-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt (VMware) <rostedt@goodmis.org>
This commit is contained in:
Steven Rostedt (VMware) 2020-11-16 15:46:52 -05:00
parent 76980f5fa0
commit 3a37b91894
1 changed files with 6 additions and 0 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

6
Documentation/trace/ftrace-uses.rst
View File

@ -116,6 +116,8 @@ called by a callback may also be traced, and call that same callback,
recursion protection must be used. There are two helper functions that recursion protection must be used. There are two helper functions that
can help in this regard. If you start your code with: can help in this regard. If you start your code with:
.. code-block:: c
int bit; int bit;
bit = ftrace_test_recursion_trylock(ip, parent_ip); bit = ftrace_test_recursion_trylock(ip, parent_ip);
@ -124,6 +126,8 @@ can help in this regard. If you start your code with:
and end it with: and end it with:
.. code-block:: c
ftrace_test_recursion_unlock(bit); ftrace_test_recursion_unlock(bit);
The code in between will be safe to use, even if it ends up calling a The code in between will be safe to use, even if it ends up calling a
@ -145,6 +149,8 @@ protection, it is best to make sure that RCU is "watching", otherwise
that data or critical section will not be protected as expected. In this that data or critical section will not be protected as expected. In this
case add: case add:
.. code-block:: c
if (!rcu_is_watching()) if (!rcu_is_watching())
return; return;