linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/4 tip/sched/core] sched: rename preempt_notifier to sched

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]

Message-ID: <1259231565.4273.31.camel@twins>
Date:	Thu, 26 Nov 2009 11:32:45 +0100
From:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc:	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	linux-next@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4 tip/sched/core] sched: rename preempt_notifier to
 sched_notifier and always enable it

On Thu, 2009-11-26 at 11:29 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org> wrote:
> 
> > Rename preempt_notifier to sched_notifier, move it from preempt.h to 
> > sched.h, drop sched_ prefixes from ops names and make sched_notifier 
> > always enabled.
> > 
> > This is to prepare for adding more notification hooks.  This patch 
> > doesn't make any functional changes.
> 
> The sched notifiers and the various event notifiers we have in the same 
> codepaths should really be unified into a single callback framework.
> 
> We have these _5_ callbacks:
> 
> ....
>         perf_event_task_sched_out(prev, next, cpu);
> ....
>         fire_sched_out_notifiers(prev, next);
> ....
>         trace_sched_switch(rq, prev, next);
> ....
>         perf_event_task_sched_in(current, cpu_of(rq));
> 	fire_sched_in_notifiers(current);
> ....
> 
> That could be done with just two callbacks - one for sched-out, one for 
> sched-in.
> 
> The best way to do that would be to use two TRACE_EVENT() callbacks, 
> make them unconditional and register to them. (with wrappers to make it 
> all convenient to use)
> 
> This requires some work but needs to be done.

Ugh,.. it also makes TRACE_EVENT unconditional.

That really wants a separate option.. What we could do is take regular
notifier lists and extend them to auto-generate a tracepoint when the
trace stuff is enabled or 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/