[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c62985530811130926y656f8f4ancd592f26cdbbee6b@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2008 18:26:49 +0100
From: "Frédéric Weisbecker" <fweisbec@...il.com>
To: "Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: "Steven Rostedt" <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
"Linux Kernel" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Peter Zijlstra" <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] tracing/function-return-tracer: Make the function return tracer lockless
2008/11/13 Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>:
> "prev_global_time" also acts as a global serializer: it ensures that
> events are timestamped in a monotonic and ordered way.
>
> i.e. something like this (pseudocode, without the cmpxchg):
>
> u64 prev_global_time;
>
> DEFINE_PER_CPU(prev_local_time);
>
> u64 global_time()
> {
> u64 now, delta, now_global;
>
> prev_global = prev_global_time;
> now = sched_clock();
> delta = now - per_cpu(prev_local_time, this_cpu);
> per_cpu(prev_local_time, this_cpu) = now;
>
> now_global = prev_global + delta;
> prev_global = now_global;
>
> return now_global;
> }
>
> note how we build "global time" out of "local time".
>
> The cmpxchg would be used to put the above one into a loop, and
> instead of updating the global time in a racy way:
>
> prev_global = now_global;
>
> We'd update it via the cmpxchg:
>
> atomic64_t prev_global_time;
>
> ...
>
> while (atomic64_cmpxchg(&prev_global_time,
> prev_global, now_global) != prev_global) {
> [...]
> }
>
> To make sure the global time goes monotonic. (this way we also avoid a
> spinlock - locks are fragile for instrumentation)
Ok, I understand better.
But consider the following:
u64 global_time()
{
u64 now, delta, now_global;
prev_global = prev_global_time;
while (atomic64_cmpxchg(&prev_global_time,
prev_global, now_global) != prev_global) {
now = sched_clock();
delta = now - per_cpu(prev_local_time, this_cpu);
per_cpu(prev_local_time, this_cpu) = now;
now_global = prev_global + delta;
prev_global = now_global;
}
return now_global;
}
Sarting with prev_global_time = 0
If we have two cpu and the above function is executed 5 times on the first cpu.
We couldl have per_cpu(prev_local_time) = 50 for example. And so
prev_global_time will be equal to 50.
Just after that, almost at the same time, cpu2 calls global_time()
delta will be equal to 50 (sched_clock() - per_cpu(prev_local_time)
which is 0) and prev_global_time will be 50 + 50 = 100.
This is not consistent.
I don't know where but I'm pretty sure I missed something....
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists