All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>
Cc: prasad@linux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	mingo@elte.hu, Gautham R Shenoy <ego@in.ibm.com>,
	mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca, linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org,
	dipankar@in.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Markers Implementation for RCU Tracing - Ver II
Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2008 11:48:25 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080218194825.GF10471@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <47B97E63.3070205@siemens.com>

On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 01:47:31PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> K. Prasad wrote:
> > Hi Ingo,
> > 	Please accept these patches into the rt tree which convert the
> > existing RCU tracing mechanism for Preempt RCU and RCU Boost into
> > markers.
> >  
> > These patches are based upon the 2.6.24-rc5-rt1 kernel tree.
> >  
> > Along with marker transition, the RCU Tracing infrastructure has also
> > been modularised to be built as a kernel module, thereby enabling
> > runtime changes to the RCU Tracing infrastructure.
> >  
> > Patch [1/2] - Patch that converts the Preempt RCU tracing in
> > rcupreempt.c into markers.
> >  
> > Patch [1/2] - Patch that converts the Preempt RCU Boost tracing in
> > rcupreempt-boost.c into markers.
> >  
> 
> I have a technical problem with marker-based RCU tracing: It causes
> nasty recursions with latest multi-probe marker patches (sorry, no link
> at hand, can be found in latest LTTng, maybe also already in -mm). Those
> patches introduce a marker probe trampoline like this:
> 
> void marker_probe_cb(const struct marker *mdata, void *call_private,
> 	const char *fmt, ...)
> {
> 	va_list args;
> 	char ptype;
> 
> 	/*
> 	 * rcu_read_lock does two things : disabling preemption to make sure the
> 	 * teardown of the callbacks can be done correctly when they are in
> 	 * modules and they insure RCU read coherency.
> 	 */
> 	rcu_read_lock();
> 	preempt_disable();
> 	...
> 
> Can we do multi-probe with pure preempt_disable/enable protection? I
> guess it's fine with classic RCU, but what about preemptible RCU? Any
> suggestion appreciated!

If you substitute synchronize_sched() for synchronize_rcu(), this should
work fine.  Of course, this approach would cause RCU tracing to degrade
latencies somewhat in -rt.

If tracing is using call_rcu(), we will need to add a call_sched()
or some such.

						Thanx, Paul

> Jan
> 
> PS: You will run into this issue if you try to marry latest -rt with
> latest LTTng. Straightforward workaround is to comment-out any RCU
> trace_mark occurrences.
> 
> -- 
> Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT SE 2
> Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux

  reply	other threads:[~2008-02-18 19:48 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-12-31  6:09 [PATCH 2/2] Markers Implementation for Preempt RCU Boost Tracing K. Prasad
2007-12-31 10:20 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-01-02  3:31   ` Frank Ch. Eigler
2008-01-02 12:47     ` Ingo Molnar
2008-01-02 16:33       ` Frank Ch. Eigler
2008-01-02 17:01         ` Ingo Molnar
2008-01-02 17:56           ` Frank Ch. Eigler
2008-01-02 20:10             ` Ingo Molnar
2008-01-07 18:59           ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-01-13 18:07             ` Pavel Machek
2008-01-14 15:35               ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-01-14 16:30                 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-01-14 19:36                   ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-01-02 23:49         ` Nicholas Miell
2008-01-03 19:24   ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-01-03 16:30 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-01-04 10:58   ` Gautham R Shenoy
2008-01-05 12:46     ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-01-07 19:43       ` K. Prasad
2008-01-07 19:50       ` [PATCH 0/2] Markers Implementation for RCU Tracing - Ver II K. Prasad
2008-02-18 12:21         ` Jan Kiszka
2008-02-18 12:47         ` Jan Kiszka
2008-02-18 19:48           ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2008-02-18 20:41             ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-02-19 16:27             ` Markers: multi-probe locking fun (was: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Markers Implementation for RCU Tracing - Ver II) Jan Kiszka
2008-02-19 20:33               ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-02-19 22:18                 ` Paul E. McKenney
2008-02-19 22:32                   ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-02-19 21:54               ` Paul E. McKenney
2008-02-19 22:03                 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-02-19 22:19                   ` Paul E. McKenney
2008-01-07 19:55       ` [PATCH 1/2] Markers Implementation for RCU Preempt Tracing - Ver II K. Prasad
2008-01-07 19:56       ` [PATCH 2/2] Markers Implementation for Preempt RCU Boost " K. Prasad
2008-01-04 12:09   ` __get_cpu_var() called from a preempt-unsafe context in __rcu_preempt_unboost() ? Gautham R Shenoy
2008-01-04 13:48     ` 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=20080218194825.GF10471@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=dipankar@in.ibm.com \
    --cc=ego@in.ibm.com \
    --cc=jan.kiszka@siemens.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=prasad@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 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.