Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for Feb 4

From: Dave Hansen <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2015 10:11:31 -0800

On 02/05/2015 10:08 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> --- a/include/trace/events/tlb.h
> +++ b/include/trace/events/tlb.h
> @@ -13,11 +13,13 @@
>  	{ TLB_LOCAL_SHOOTDOWN,		"local shootdown" },		\
>  	{ TLB_LOCAL_MM_SHOOTDOWN,	"local mm shootdown" }
>  
> -TRACE_EVENT(tlb_flush,
> +TRACE_EVENT_CONDITION(tlb_flush,
>  
>  	TP_PROTO(int reason, unsigned long pages),
>  	TP_ARGS(reason, pages),
>  
> +	TP_CONDITION(cpu_online(smp_processor_id())),

That's a pretty reasonable fix, although it would be nice if the
debugging was easier to hit.  Did I actually need to be
onlining/offlining CPUs to hit the splat that Sedat was reporting?