From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756921Ab1FJMnF (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Jun 2011 08:43:05 -0400 Received: from casper.infradead.org ([85.118.1.10]:35633 "EHLO casper.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755528Ab1FJMnD convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Jun 2011 08:43:03 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] printk: Release console_sem after logbuf_lock From: Peter Zijlstra To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Hugh Dickins , Andrew Morton , Linus Torvalds , Thomas Gleixner , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, efault@gmx.de, Arne Jansen , PaulMundt , linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <1307709714.3941.140.camel@twins> References: <20110609130647.937204592@chello.nl> <20110609131307.493181962@chello.nl> <20110609130617.f8aca966.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20110609202707.GA28951@elte.hu> <1307652883.2497.1028.camel@laptop> <20110609140714.fc9ea187.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <1307705311.3941.118.camel@twins> <1307709030.3941.134.camel@twins> <20110610123416.GA12451@elte.hu> <1307709714.3941.140.camel@twins> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2011 14:42:44 +0200 Message-ID: <1307709764.3941.141.camel@twins> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.30.3 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 2011-06-10 at 14:41 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Fri, 2011-06-10 at 14:34 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > > > thinking that that would have my printk stmts appear on both the > > > fbcon as well as the serial line. But they fail to appear on the > > > latency tracer (current max was 165us waking an idle cpu). > > > > Have you removed this bit: > > > > spin_unlock(&logbuf_lock); > > stop_critical_timings(); /* don't trace print latency */ > > call_console_drivers(_con_start, _log_end); > > start_critical_timings(); > > local_irq_restore(flags); > > > > which hides the latencies from the latency tracer? > > it shouldn't those flags come from spin_lock_irqsave(), which already > has IRQs disabled, so the restore shouldn't re-enable them. > > Hmm,. that might actually already be true for mainline too, yeah, looks > like we call vprintk()->console_unlock() with IRQs-disabled. > > Hohumm.. Also, I used the preemptirqoff tracer, so even if it did re-enable interrupts we should still have preemption disabled and still catch the latency.