From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1753721AbbCaAe2 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Mon, 30 Mar 2015 20:34:28 -0400
Received: from LGEMRELSE7Q.lge.com ([156.147.1.151]:57260 "EHLO
	lgemrelse7q.lge.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1753767AbbCaAeL (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Mon, 30 Mar 2015 20:34:11 -0400
X-Original-SENDERIP: 10.177.220.203
X-Original-MAILFROM: namhyung@kernel.org
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2015 09:27:30 +0900
From: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>
To: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <arnaldo.melo@gmail.com>
Cc: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>, David Ahern <dsahern@gmail.com>,
        Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>, Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [BUG] segfault in perf-top -- thread refcnt
Message-ID: <20150331002730.GE32033@sejong>
References: <551593EA.2030201@gmail.com>
 <20150327201126.GM21510@kernel.org>
 <5515B9E6.5020007@gmail.com>
 <20150330080737.GD1413@krava>
 <20150330102220.GE1413@krava>
 <20150330112108.GG1413@krava>
 <20150330114907.GH1413@krava>
 <20150330124852.GA4507@danjae.kornet>
 <20150330145805.GC32560@kernel.org>
 <20150330151303.GD32560@kernel.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20150330151303.GD32560@kernel.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 12:13:03PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> Em Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 11:58:05AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu:
> > Em Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 09:48:52PM +0900, Namhyung Kim escreveu:
> > > But this makes every sample processing grabs and releases the lock so
> > > might cause high overhead.  It can be a problem if such processing is
> > > done parallelly like my multi-thread work. :-/
> > 
> > Still untested, using rw lock, next step is auditing the
> > machine__findnew_thread users that really should be using
> > machine__find_thread, i.e. grabbing just the reader lock, and measuring
> > the overhead of using a pthread rw lock instead of pthread_mutex_t as
> > Jiri is doing.
> 
> Don't bother trying it, doesn't even compile ;-\

OK. :)

But I think rw lock still has not-so-low overhead as it involves
atomic operations and cache misses.

Thanks,
Namhyung