From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-rt-users <linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Tom Zanussi <tom.zanussi@linux.intel.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>, fweisbec <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>,
kbuild test robot <fengguang.wu@intel.com>,
baohong liu <baohong.liu@intel.com>,
vedang patel <vedang.patel@intel.com>,
kernel-team <kernel-team@lge.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC v4 3/4] irqflags: Avoid unnecessary calls to trace_ if you can
Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 17:22:44 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180423172244.694dbc9d@gandalf.local.home> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1212130312.14753.1524503541789.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com>
On Mon, 23 Apr 2018 13:12:21 -0400 (EDT)
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> wrote:
> I'm inclined to explicitly declare the tracepoints with their given
> synchronization method. Tracepoint probe callback functions for currently
> existing tracepoints expect to have preemption disabled when invoked.
> This assumption will not be true anymore for srcu-tracepoints.
Actually, why not have a flag attached to the tracepoint_func that
states if it expects preemption to be enabled or not? If a
trace_##event##_srcu() is called, then simply disable preemption before
calling the callbacks for it. That way if a callback is fine for use
with srcu, then it would require calling
register_trace_##event##_may_sleep();
Then if someone uses this on a tracepoint where preemption is disabled,
we simply do not call it.
-- Steve
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-04-23 21:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 44+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-04-17 4:07 [RFC v4 0/4] Centralize and unify usage of preempt/irq tracepoints Joel Fernandes
2018-04-17 4:07 ` [RFC v4 1/4] tracepoint: Add API to not do lockdep checks during RCU ops Joel Fernandes
2018-04-17 4:07 ` [RFC v4 2/4] softirq: reorder trace_softirqs_on to prevent lockdep splat Joel Fernandes
2018-04-17 4:07 ` [RFC v4 3/4] irqflags: Avoid unnecessary calls to trace_ if you can Joel Fernandes
2018-04-18 9:02 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2018-04-19 5:43 ` Namhyung Kim
2018-04-20 7:07 ` Joel Fernandes
2018-04-23 1:14 ` Joel Fernandes
2018-04-23 3:19 ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-04-23 14:31 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-04-23 14:53 ` Steven Rostedt
2018-04-23 14:59 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-04-23 15:12 ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-04-23 16:18 ` Steven Rostedt
2018-04-23 17:12 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-04-23 17:24 ` Joel Fernandes
2018-04-23 21:22 ` Steven Rostedt [this message]
2018-04-24 15:56 ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-04-24 16:01 ` Joel Fernandes
2018-04-24 17:26 ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-04-24 18:23 ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-04-24 18:26 ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-04-24 18:59 ` Joel Fernandes
2018-04-24 19:01 ` Joel Fernandes
2018-04-24 19:09 ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-04-24 19:16 ` Joel Fernandes
2018-04-24 23:21 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-04-24 23:46 ` Joel Fernandes
2018-04-25 0:10 ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-04-25 4:20 ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-04-25 21:27 ` Joel Fernandes
2018-04-25 21:35 ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-04-25 21:40 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-04-25 22:51 ` Steven Rostedt
2018-04-26 15:03 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-04-26 16:08 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-04-25 23:13 ` Joel Fernandes
2018-04-26 15:13 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2018-04-26 15:20 ` Joel Fernandes
2018-04-26 15:49 ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-04-23 15:49 ` Joel Fernandes
2018-04-26 2:18 ` Joel Fernandes
2018-05-01 1:18 ` Joel Fernandes
2018-04-17 4:07 ` [RFC v4 4/4] tracing: Centralize preemptirq tracepoints and unify their usage Joel Fernandes
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=20180423172244.694dbc9d@gandalf.local.home \
--to=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=baohong.liu@intel.com \
--cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
--cc=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=joelaf@google.com \
--cc=kernel-team@lge.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=mhiramat@kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rdunlap@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tom.zanussi@linux.intel.com \
--cc=vedang.patel@intel.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).