From: Mathieu Desnoyers via lttng-dev <lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org>
To: lbj <lbj137@yahoo.com>
Cc: paulmck <paulmck@kernel.org>, lttng-dev <lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org>
Subject: Re: [lttng-dev] QSBR urcu read lock question
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2021 12:00:28 -0400 (EDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <219280299.78204.1618502428396.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7E67A2E3-2ABD-430D-8F06-A09A6E69FD8C@yahoo.com>
----- On Apr 15, 2021, at 10:54 AM, lbj lbj137@yahoo.com wrote:
> Mathieu,
> Thanks so much for your wealth if information and timely responses, they are
> greatly appreciated. Final question: is there any harm in explicitly calling
> rcu_thread_online/rcu_thread_offline from within my call_rcu callback function?
> From what you described it sounds like it would be redundant, but presumably
> would be harmless. Correct? Thanks again.
You could indeed invoke pairs of:
rcu_thread_offline(); <--- emphasis on _offline_ here.
[ long wait ... ]
rcu_thread_online();
in that specific order within the call-rcu worker thread. Note that the qsbr state
of the call-rcu worker thread is "online" when it invokes the callbacks, so each callback
should make sure that state is back to "online" before it returns control back
to its caller.
Thanks,
Mathieu
--
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com
_______________________________________________
lttng-dev mailing list
lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org
https://lists.lttng.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lttng-dev
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-04-15 16:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <13D87E55-7D1B-49B0-9555-656A837ADEB3.ref@yahoo.com>
2021-04-05 17:43 ` [lttng-dev] QSBR urcu question lbj via lttng-dev
2021-04-06 20:05 ` Mathieu Desnoyers via lttng-dev
2021-04-14 3:19 ` [lttng-dev] QSBR urcu read lock question lbj via lttng-dev
2021-04-15 12:20 ` Mathieu Desnoyers via lttng-dev
2021-04-15 12:41 ` lbj via lttng-dev
2021-04-15 13:04 ` Mathieu Desnoyers via lttng-dev
2021-04-15 14:54 ` lbj via lttng-dev
2021-04-15 16:00 ` Mathieu Desnoyers via lttng-dev [this message]
2021-04-15 18:11 ` lbj via lttng-dev
2021-04-15 19:26 ` Mathieu Desnoyers via lttng-dev
2021-04-15 20:58 ` lbj via lttng-dev
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=219280299.78204.1618502428396.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com \
--to=lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org \
--cc=lbj137@yahoo.com \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
/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).