From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Li Zefan <lizf@cn.fujitsu.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tracing/profile: Fix profile_disable vs module_unload
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 15:44:32 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090826194432.GA5298@Krystal> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1251314046.18584.38.camel@twins>
* Peter Zijlstra (peterz@infradead.org) wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-08-26 at 12:46 -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> > Registering tracepoints even when no tracepoint definition is currently
> > visible is the intended allowed behavior. Let's say we need to trace
> > something happening in module init: if we disallow registering the tp
> > callback before the module is initialized, we run in a chicken and egg
> > problem.
> >
> > So I am trying to figure out the problem source there. Is it that
> > modules containing the tp callbacks need to know if those are actually
> > connected to an instrumented module ? Or is it that the instrumented
> > module needs to know if a probe module is connected to is ? Or is it the
> > teardown of the probe module ? No refcount is needed there, because we
> > surround the probe call by preempt disable/enable, and we use
> > synchronize_sched() before removing the module which contains probe
> > callbacks.
> >
> > Mathieu-trying-to-figure-out-what-this-whole-thread-is-about :)
>
> OK, so the whole point seems to be that tracepoints have the funny thing
> you describe above, whereas the things ftrace makes out of TRACE_EVENT()
> get instantiated along with modules.
>
> The reason why I rejected the initial patch (and I still think that that
> fix is at the wrong layer) is that I, as a consumer of whatever
> TRACE_EVENT() offers, should never need to consider modules.
>
Hrm, is it just me, or include/trace/ftrace.h fails to call the
following function after tracepoint unregistration ?
/*
* tracepoint_synchronize_unregister must be called between the last tracepoint
* probe unregistration and the end of module exit to make sure there is no
* caller executing a probe when it is freed.
*/
static inline void tracepoint_synchronize_unregister(void)
{
synchronize_sched();
}
This might solve all our problems.
Basically, it does not need to be called after each individual
tracepoint unregistration, but does need to be called before removal of
the module containing the probles (e.g. in module exit()).
Mathieu
--
Mathieu Desnoyers
OpenPGP key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-08-26 19:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 52+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-08-24 4:19 [PATCH] tracing/profile: Fix profile_disable vs module_unload Li Zefan
2009-08-24 6:01 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-08-24 6:22 ` Li Zefan
2009-08-24 6:56 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-08-24 9:24 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-08-24 9:27 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-08-24 16:13 ` Steven Rostedt
2009-08-25 5:22 ` Li Zefan
2009-08-25 6:21 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-08-25 6:33 ` Li Zefan
2009-08-25 6:40 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-08-25 9:05 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-08-25 9:12 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-08-25 10:22 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-08-25 10:32 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-08-25 10:39 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-08-25 10:47 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-08-25 14:52 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-08-26 6:18 ` Li Zefan
2009-08-26 6:46 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-08-26 6:52 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-08-26 7:01 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-08-26 7:10 ` Li Zefan
2009-08-26 7:26 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-08-26 7:31 ` Li Zefan
2009-08-26 7:39 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-08-26 7:44 ` Li Zefan
2009-08-26 14:37 ` Steven Rostedt
2009-08-26 16:46 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-08-26 17:48 ` Steven Rostedt
2009-08-26 18:01 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-08-26 18:17 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-08-26 19:48 ` Steven Rostedt
2009-08-26 19:53 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-08-26 21:21 ` Steven Rostedt
2009-08-26 22:29 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-08-27 1:53 ` Li Zefan
2009-08-27 2:13 ` Steven Rostedt
2009-08-27 14:39 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-08-27 14:56 ` Steven Rostedt
2009-08-27 15:11 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-08-27 15:51 ` Steven Rostedt
2009-08-27 15:59 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-08-27 16:03 ` Steven Rostedt
2009-08-27 6:25 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-08-27 15:57 ` Steven Rostedt
2009-08-27 16:04 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-08-27 16:18 ` Steven Rostedt
2009-08-27 1:01 ` Li Zefan
2009-08-26 19:14 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-08-26 19:44 ` Mathieu Desnoyers [this message]
2009-09-13 15:02 ` [tip:tracing/core] tracing/profile: fix " tip-bot for Li Zefan
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=20090826194432.GA5298@Krystal \
--to=mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lizf@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox