From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
Cc: paulus <paulus@samba.org>,
stephane eranian <eranian@googlemail.com>,
Robert Richter <robert.richter@amd.com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
Paul Mundt <lethal@linux-sh.org>,
Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com>,
Lin Ming <ming.m.lin@intel.com>,
Yanmin <yanmin_zhang@linux.intel.com>,
Deng-Cheng Zhu <dengcheng.zhu@gmail.com>,
David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 3/8] perf: register pmu implementations
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 19:48:00 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1276710480.1745.608.camel@laptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100616170354.GA5530@nowhere>
On Wed, 2010-06-16 at 19:03 +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > +static struct pmu perf_breakpoint = {
> > + .event_init = hw_breakpoint_event_init,
>
>
>
> Should be bp_perf_event_init?
Ah, yes, like said, the compiler didn't get near yet..
>
> > + .enable = arch_install_hw_breakpoint,
> > + .disable = arch_uninstall_hw_breakpoint,
> > + .read = hw_breakpoint_pmu_read,
> > +};
> <snip>
> > +static int perf_swevent_int(struct perf_event *event)
> > +{
> > + if (event->attr.type != PERF_TYPE_SOFTWARE)
> > + return -ENOENT
>
>
> perf_swevent_init() ?
copy/paste gone wild..
> > +void perf_pmu_unregister(struct pmu *pmu)
> > +{
> > + spin_lock(&pmus_lock);
> > + list_del_rcu(&pmu->entry);
> > + spin_unlock(&pmus_lock);
> > +
> > + synchronize_srcu(&pmus_srcu);
> > +}
> Who needs this?
Nobody yet..
> > +
> > +struct pmu *perf_init_event(struct perf_event *event)
> > +{
> > + struct pmu *pmu;
> > + int idx;
> > +
> > + idx = srcu_read_lock(&pmus_srcu);
> > + list_for_each_entry_rcu(pmu, &pmus, entry) {
> > + int ret = pmu->event_init(event);
> > + if (!ret)
> > + break;
> > + if (ret != -ENOENT) {
> > + pmu = ERR_PTR(ret);
> > + break;
> > }
> > - pmu = &perf_ops_generic;
> > - break;
> > }
> > + srcu_read_unlock(&pmus_srcu, idx);
>
>
>
> This could use a simple mutex instead of a spinlock + srcu_sync on
> writer and srcu on reader.
Right, that spinlock needs to be a mutex for sure, a later patch adds an
allocation under it.
But even with a mutex we need srcu_sync in there to sync against the
readers.
> That doesn't matter much that said. What I don't understand is
> why we need to synchronize the writers. Walking the list with
> list_*_rcu() looks justified once we support boot events, but
> until then...
Well, the typical unregister user would be a module, if you unregister
and then dealloc the struct pmu by unloading the module a reader might
still see a reference to it if you don't srcu_sync it.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-06-16 17:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-06-16 16:00 [RFC][PATCH 0/8] perf pmu interface Peter Zijlstra
2010-06-16 16:00 ` [RFC][PATCH 1/8] perf, x86: Fix Nehalem PMU quirk Peter Zijlstra
2010-06-16 16:00 ` [RFC][PATCH 2/8] perf: deconstify struct pmu Peter Zijlstra
2010-06-16 16:00 ` [RFC][PATCH 3/8] perf: register pmu implementations Peter Zijlstra
2010-06-16 16:45 ` Robert Richter
2010-06-16 17:03 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-06-16 17:48 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2010-06-16 18:10 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-06-18 4:51 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-06-17 23:31 ` Paul Mackerras
2010-06-18 8:40 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-06-16 16:00 ` [RFC][PATCH 4/8] perf: Unindent labels Peter Zijlstra
2010-06-16 17:16 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-06-16 17:48 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-06-16 16:00 ` [RFC][PATCH 5/8] perf: Reduce perf_disable() usage Peter Zijlstra
2010-06-16 16:52 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2010-06-16 16:00 ` [RFC][PATCH 6/8] perf: Per PMU disable Peter Zijlstra
2010-06-16 17:48 ` Robert Richter
2010-06-16 17:58 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-06-18 2:14 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-06-18 7:11 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-06-22 16:21 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-06-22 17:09 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-06-16 16:00 ` [RFC][PATCH 7/8] perf: Default PMU ops Peter Zijlstra
2010-06-16 16:00 ` [RFC][PATCH 8/8] perf: Rework the PMU methods Peter Zijlstra
2010-06-18 4:21 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-06-18 7:15 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-06-22 16:26 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-06-22 17:10 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-06-16 18:19 ` [RFC][PATCH 0/8] perf pmu interface Peter Zijlstra
2010-06-18 4:35 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-06-18 7:22 ` Peter Zijlstra
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=1276710480.1745.608.camel@laptop \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dengcheng.zhu@gmail.com \
--cc=eranian@googlemail.com \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=gorcunov@gmail.com \
--cc=lethal@linux-sh.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ming.m.lin@intel.com \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
--cc=robert.richter@amd.com \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
--cc=yanmin_zhang@linux.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