[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1281130175.3352.15.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com>
Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2010 17:29:35 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Cc: Marcin Slusarz <marcin.slusarz@...il.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tracing: wake up tasks reading trace_pipe on write to
trace_marker
On Fri, 2010-08-06 at 22:55 +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > This can't work. trace_printk() and friends must be able to be used
> > anywhere. This can cause race conditions with the rq locks in the
> > scheduler.
> >
> > But you do bring up a good idea. That is, perhaps we should have a way
> > to attach to known safe tracepoints that we can hook to to check if a
> > wake up should happen or not.
>
>
> This could be a simple macro that takes the name of the trace event:
>
>
> DEFINE_EVENT(event_tpl, event_name, ...);
>
>
> TRACE_EVENT_NO_WAKE(event_name);
>
Yeah, that may be worth doing for 2.6.37. Might as well also add a
trace_printk_nowake() too, when you know you are in dangerous locations
like the scheduler or NMI.
> I think trace events should be wakeable by default as it looks safe for
> most of them. But probably we don't want that per event class.
>
> In the unsafe list, I only have some sched and lock events in
> mind, but I bet there are some others.
Yep, will put that on my todo list.
Thanks,
-- Steve
--
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