From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758725AbeD0Qqq (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Apr 2018 12:46:46 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:54102 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758554AbeD0Qqp (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Apr 2018 12:46:45 -0400 DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 4CDCC2188E Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=goodmis.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=rostedt@goodmis.org Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2018 12:46:41 -0400 From: Steven Rostedt To: "Paul E. McKenney" Cc: Joel Fernandes , LKML , Peter Zilstra , Ingo Molnar , Mathieu Desnoyers , Tom Zanussi , Namhyung Kim , Thomas Glexiner , Boqun Feng , Frederic Weisbecker , Randy Dunlap , Masami Hiramatsu , Fenguang Wu , Baohong Liu , Vedang Patel , "Cc: Android Kernel" Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] tracepoint: Introduce tracepoint callbacks executing with preempt on Message-ID: <20180427124641.7b991c57@gandalf.local.home> In-Reply-To: <20180427164554.GO26088@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <20180427042656.190746-1-joelaf@google.com> <20180427155701.GL26088@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20180427122201.75abc313@gandalf.local.home> <20180427164554.GO26088@linux.vnet.ibm.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.16.0 (GTK+ 2.24.32; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 27 Apr 2018 09:45:54 -0700 "Paul E. McKenney" wrote: > > > That shouldn't be needed. For the rcu_read_lock_sched case, there is a > > > preempt_disable which needs to be a notrace, but for the srcu one, > > > since we don't do that, I think it should be fine. > > > > Actually, I think I may agree here too. Because the _notrace is for > > function tracing, and it shouldn't affect it. If people don't want it > > traced, they could add those functions to the list in the notrace file. > > OK, feel free to ignore my notrace srcu_read_lock() patch, then. ;-) Of course I wasn't thinking about the lockdep tracepoints that Joel mentioned, which happens to be the reason for all this discussion in the first place :-) Now I think we do need it. (OK, I can keep changing my mind, can't I?). -- Steve