[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090315045904.GA20949@elte.hu>
Date: Sun, 15 Mar 2009 05:59:04 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, tglx@...utronix.de,
Jason Baron <jbaron@...hat.com>,
"Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@...hat.com>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>,
Jiaying Zhang <jiayingz@...gle.com>,
Michael Rubin <mrubin@...gle.com>,
Martin Bligh <mbligh@...gle.com>,
Michael Davidson <md@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2 v2] tracing/syscalls: core infrastructure for
syscalls tracing
* Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Mar 2009 15:42:11 +0100 Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com> wrote:
>
> > +void start_ftrace_syscalls(void)
> > +{
> > + unsigned long flags;
> > + struct task_struct *g, *t;
> > +
> > + if (atomic_inc_return(&refcount) != 1)
> > + goto out;
> > +
> > + arch_init_ftrace_syscalls();
> > + read_lock_irqsave(&tasklist_lock, flags);
> > +
> > + do_each_thread(g, t) {
> > + set_tsk_thread_flag(t, TIF_SYSCALL_FTRACE);
> > + } while_each_thread(g, t);
> > +
> > + read_unlock_irqrestore(&tasklist_lock, flags);
> > +out:
> > + atomic_dec(&refcount);
> > +}
> > +
> > +void stop_ftrace_syscalls(void)
> > +{
> > + unsigned long flags;
> > + struct task_struct *g, *t;
> > +
> > + if (atomic_dec_return(&refcount))
> > + goto out;
> > +
> > + read_lock_irqsave(&tasklist_lock, flags);
> > +
> > + do_each_thread(g, t) {
> > + clear_tsk_thread_flag(t, TIF_SYSCALL_FTRACE);
> > + } while_each_thread(g, t);
> > +
> > + read_unlock_irqrestore(&tasklist_lock, flags);
> > +out:
> > + atomic_inc(&refcount);
> > +}
>
> What is this `refcount' thing trying to do? afacit it does
> not prevent the two loops from running concurrently and making
> a mess.
>
> If it _is_ trying to prevent that from happening, then why not
> use plain old mutex_lock()?
yeah - already commented about that to Frederic over IRC. A
plain flag, checked inside the tasklist lock is more than
enough.
Ingo
--
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