[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20101216193635.GC2856@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 14:36:35 -0500
From: Jason Baron <jbaron@...hat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: hpa@...or.com, rostedt@...dmis.org, mingo@...e.hu,
mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca, tglx@...utronix.de,
andi@...stfloor.org, roland@...hat.com, rth@...hat.com,
masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com, fweisbec@...il.com,
avi@...hat.com, davem@...emloft.net, sam@...nborg.org,
ddaney@...iumnetworks.com, michael@...erman.id.au,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC 1/2] jump label: make enable/disable o(1)
On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 08:33:51PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-12-16 at 14:23 -0500, Jason Baron wrote:
> >
> > For the jump label disabled case, perf is using atomic_inc/dec and atomic_read
> > to check if enabled. While other consumers (tracepoints) are just using an
> > 'int'. I didn't want hurt the jump label disabled case for tracepoints.
> > If we can agree to use atomic ops for tracepoints, or drop atomics from
> > perf, that would simplify things.
>
> I had a quick look at the tracepoint stuff but got lost, but surely it
> has a reference count somewhere as well, it needs to know when the last
> probe goes away.. or does it check if the list is empty?
>
> Anyway, tracepoint enable/disable isn't a real fast-path, surely it
> could suffer an atomic op?
It is the atomic_read() at the tracepoint site that I am concerned
about.
thanks,
-Jason
--
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