From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
Cc: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/5] tracing: Make sure rcu_irq_enter() can work for trace_*_rcuidle() trace events
Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2017 13:55:15 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170407135515.6e212a1b@gandalf.local.home> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1679331943.4538.1491587357083.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com>
On Fri, 7 Apr 2017 17:49:17 +0000 (UTC)
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> wrote:
> > Welcome to MACRO MAGIC!
Somebody is not wizardly happy.
> >
> >>
> >> as one argument to the __DO_TRACE() macro. To me it's a bit unexpected
> >> coding-style wise. Am I the only one not comfortable with the proposed
> >> syntax ?
> >
> > The entire TRACE_EVENT()/__DO_TRACE() is special.
> >
> > I thought about add yet another parameter, but as it doesn't change
> > much, I figured this was good enough. We could beak it up if you like:
> >
> > #define RCU_IRQ_ENTER_CHECK \
> > if (WARN_ON_ONCE(rcu_irq_enter_disabled()) \
> > return; \
> > rcu_irq_enter_irqson();
> >
> > [..]
> > __DO_TRACE(&__tracepoint_##name, \
> > TP_PROTO(data_proto), \
> > TP_ARGS(data_args), \
> > TP_CONDITION(cond), \
> > PARAMS(RCU_IRQ_ENTER_CHECK), \
> > rcu_irq_exit_irqson()); \
> >
> >
> > Would that make you feel more comfortable?
>
> No, it's almost worse and adds still adds a return that apply within __DO_TRACE(),
> but which is passed as an argument (code as macro argument), which I find really
> unsettling.
/me finds it strangely enjoyable to make Mathieu unsettled.
>
> I would prefer to add a new argument to __DO_TRACE, which we can call
> "checkrcu", e.g.:
>
> #define __DO_TRACE(tp, proto, args, cond, checkrcu, prercu, postrcu) \
Grumble. I was trying to avoid making the patch more intrusive. But I
do understand your concern.
> do { \
> struct tracepoint_func *it_func_ptr; \
> void *it_func; \
> void *__data; \
> \
> if (!((cond) && (checkrcu))) \
> return; \
> prercu; \
> rcu_read_lock_sched_notrace(); \
> it_func_ptr = rcu_dereference_sched((tp)->funcs); \
> if (it_func_ptr) { \
> do { \
> it_func = (it_func_ptr)->func; \
> __data = (it_func_ptr)->data; \
> ((void(*)(proto))(it_func))(args); \
> } while ((++it_func_ptr)->func); \
> } \
> rcu_read_unlock_sched_notrace(); \
> postrcu; \
> } while (0)
>
> And use it like this:
>
> #define __DECLARE_TRACE_RCU(name, proto, args, cond, data_proto, data_args) \
> static inline void trace_##name##_rcuidle(proto) \
> { \
> if (static_key_false(&__tracepoint_##name.key)) \
> __DO_TRACE(&__tracepoint_##name, \
> TP_PROTO(data_proto), \
> TP_ARGS(data_args), \
> TP_CONDITION(cond), \
> !WARN_ON_ONCE(rcu_irq_enter_disabled()),\
> rcu_irq_enter_irqson(), \
> rcu_irq_exit_irqson()); \
> }
>
> This way we only pass evaluated expression (not code with "return" that
> changes the flow) as arguments to __DO_TRACE, which makes it behave more
> like a "sub-function", which is what we usually expect.
I understand what you are getting at, and I will concede your point.
OK, I'll do it your way, but I still think you take all the fun out of
it. ;-)
-- Steve
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-04-07 17:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-04-07 14:01 [PATCH 0/5 v2] tracing: Add usecase of synchronize_rcu_tasks() and stack_tracer_disable() Steven Rostedt
2017-04-07 14:01 ` [PATCH 1/5 v2] ftrace: Add use of synchronize_rcu_tasks() with dynamic trampolines Steven Rostedt
2017-04-07 14:01 ` [PATCH 2/5 v2] tracing: Replace the per_cpu() with this_cpu() in trace_stack.c Steven Rostedt
2017-04-07 14:36 ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-04-07 14:48 ` Steven Rostedt
2017-04-07 15:08 ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-04-07 14:01 ` [PATCH 3/5 v2] tracing: Add stack_tracer_disable/enable() functions Steven Rostedt
2017-04-07 14:22 ` Steven Rostedt
2017-04-07 14:25 ` [PATCH 3/5 v2.1] " Steven Rostedt
2017-04-07 14:01 ` [PATCH 4/5 v2] tracing: Rename trace_active to disable_stack_tracer and inline its modification Steven Rostedt
2017-04-07 14:01 ` [PATCH 5/5 v2] rcu: Fix dyntick-idle tracing Steven Rostedt
2017-04-07 14:40 ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-04-07 14:53 ` Steven Rostedt
2017-04-07 15:09 ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-04-07 15:29 ` Steven Rostedt
2017-04-07 14:43 ` [PATCH 0/5 v2] tracing: Add usecase of synchronize_rcu_tasks() and stack_tracer_disable() Paul E. McKenney
2017-04-07 14:58 ` Steven Rostedt
2017-04-07 15:11 ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-04-07 15:28 ` Steven Rostedt
2017-04-07 16:35 ` [PATCH 6/5]rcu/tracing: Add rcu_disabled to denote when rcu_irq_enter() will not work Steven Rostedt
2017-04-07 16:42 ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-04-07 16:44 ` Steven Rostedt
2017-04-07 16:53 ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-04-07 17:03 ` [PATCH 6/5 v2] rcu/tracing: " Steven Rostedt
2017-04-07 17:15 ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-04-07 17:06 ` [PATCH 7/5] tracing: Make sure rcu_irq_enter() can work for trace_*_rcuidle() trace events Steven Rostedt
2017-04-07 17:15 ` Paul E. McKenney
2017-04-07 17:19 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2017-04-07 17:26 ` Steven Rostedt
2017-04-07 17:32 ` Steven Rostedt
2017-04-07 17:49 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2017-04-07 17:55 ` Steven Rostedt [this message]
2017-04-07 18:10 ` [PATCH 7/5 v3] " Steven Rostedt
2017-04-07 18:17 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2017-04-07 19:41 ` [PATCH 7/5 v4] " Steven Rostedt
2017-04-07 19:43 ` Steven Rostedt
2017-04-10 17:11 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2017-04-07 17:28 ` [PATCH 7/5] " Steven Rostedt
2017-04-07 17:48 ` [PATCH 7/5 v2] " Steven Rostedt
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20170407135515.6e212a1b@gandalf.local.home \
--to=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).