[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1267830207-9474-1-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2010 15:03:25 -0800
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: mingo@...e.hu, laijs@...fujitsu.com, dipankar@...ibm.com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca,
josh@...htriplett.org, dvhltc@...ibm.com, niv@...ibm.com,
tglx@...utronix.de, peterz@...radead.org, rostedt@...dmis.org,
Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu, dhowells@...hat.com,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>
Subject: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 1/3] ftrace: replace read_barrier_depends() with rcu_dereference_raw()
Replace the calls to read_barrier_depends() in ftrace_list_func() with
rcu_dereference_raw() to improve readability. The reason that we use
rcu_dereference_raw() here is that removed entries are never freed,
instead they are simply leaked. This is one of a very few cases where
use of rcu_dereference_raw() is the long-term right answer. And I don't
yet know of any others. ;-)
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
---
kernel/trace/ftrace.c | 22 +++++++++++++---------
1 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/trace/ftrace.c b/kernel/trace/ftrace.c
index 8378357..8c5adc0 100644
--- a/kernel/trace/ftrace.c
+++ b/kernel/trace/ftrace.c
@@ -27,6 +27,7 @@
#include <linux/ctype.h>
#include <linux/list.h>
#include <linux/hash.h>
+#include <linux/rcupdate.h>
#include <trace/events/sched.h>
@@ -88,18 +89,22 @@ ftrace_func_t ftrace_pid_function __read_mostly = ftrace_stub;
static int ftrace_set_func(unsigned long *array, int *idx, char *buffer);
#endif
+/*
+ * Traverse the ftrace_list, invoking all entries. The reason that we
+ * can use rcu_dereference_raw() is that elements removed from this list
+ * are simply leaked, so there is no need to interact with a grace-period
+ * mechanism. The rcu_dereference_raw() calls are needed to handle
+ * concurrent insertions into the ftrace_list.
+ *
+ * Silly Alpha and silly pointer-speculation compiler optimizations!
+ */
static void ftrace_list_func(unsigned long ip, unsigned long parent_ip)
{
- struct ftrace_ops *op = ftrace_list;
-
- /* in case someone actually ports this to alpha! */
- read_barrier_depends();
+ struct ftrace_ops *op = rcu_dereference_raw(ftrace_list); /*see above*/
while (op != &ftrace_list_end) {
- /* silly alpha */
- read_barrier_depends();
op->func(ip, parent_ip);
- op = op->next;
+ op = rcu_dereference_raw(op->next); /*see above*/
};
}
@@ -154,8 +159,7 @@ static int __register_ftrace_function(struct ftrace_ops *ops)
* the ops->next pointer is valid before another CPU sees
* the ops pointer included into the ftrace_list.
*/
- smp_wmb();
- ftrace_list = ops;
+ rcu_assign_pointer(ftrace_list, ops);
if (ftrace_enabled) {
ftrace_func_t func;
--
1.6.6
--
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