From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
To: rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
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 17:49:17 +0000 (UTC) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1679331943.4538.1491587357083.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170407132613.4a9fa430@gandalf.local.home>
----- On Apr 7, 2017, at 1:26 PM, rostedt rostedt@goodmis.org wrote:
> On Fri, 7 Apr 2017 17:19:05 +0000 (UTC)
> Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> wrote:
>
[...]
>> > ---
>> > include/linux/tracepoint.h | 2 ++
>> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/include/linux/tracepoint.h b/include/linux/tracepoint.h
>> > index f72fcfe..8baef96 100644
>> > --- a/include/linux/tracepoint.h
>> > +++ b/include/linux/tracepoint.h
>> > @@ -159,6 +159,8 @@ extern void syscall_unregfunc(void);
>> > TP_PROTO(data_proto), \
>> > TP_ARGS(data_args), \
>> > TP_CONDITION(cond), \
>> > + if (WARN_ON_ONCE(rcu_irq_enter_disabled())) \
>> > + return; \
>>
>> I must admit that it's a bit odd to have:
>>
>> if (WARN_ON_ONCE(rcu_irq_enter_disabled()))
>> return;
>> rcu_irq_enter_irqson()
>
> Welcome to MACRO MAGIC!
>
>>
>> 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.
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) \
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.
Thanks,
Mathieu
--
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-04-07 17:48 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 [this message]
2017-04-07 17:55 ` Steven Rostedt
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=1679331943.4538.1491587357083.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com \
--to=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.