linux-kernel - Re: [Question] Hooks for scheduler tracing (CFS)

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	26 Jul 2007 10:47:40 -0400
From:	fche@...hat.com (Frank Ch. Eigler)
To:	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>
Cc:	Ankita Garg <ankita@...ibm.com>,
	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>, linux@...mer.net,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	RT-Users <linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: [Question] Hooks for scheduler tracing (CFS)

Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca> writes:

> [...]
> The problem is also in _stp_print_flush, not *only* in relay code:
> void _stp_print_flush (void)
> ...
>                 spin_lock(&_stp_print_lock);
>                 ...
>                 spin_unlock(&_stp_print_lock);
> 
> Those will turn into mutexes with -rt.

Indeed, plus systemtap-generated locking code uses rwlocks,
local_irq_save/restore or preempt_disable, in various places.  Could
someone point to a place that spells out what would be more
appropriate way of ensuring atomicity while being compatible with -rt?

- FChE
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/