[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170904193436.4a37fae4@gandalf.local.home>
Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2017 19:34:36 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Joel Fernandes <joelaf@...gle.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, kernel-team@...roid.com,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@....com>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] tracing: Add support for critical section events
On Mon, 4 Sep 2017 21:44:26 +0200
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> > I can change the name to something else, but at the moment I can't
> > think of anything better. Could you suggest a better name? Also btw,
> > 'critical timings' is the terminology used within the irqsoff tracer
> > so this is in line with that.
>
> So 'critical section' is what some mis-guided people call the locked
> region of a lock :-) Using it for something else is prone to cause more
> confusion...
>
> I would simply call them what they are: irq_disable,irq_enable
> preempt_disable,preempt_enable.
Yes please. The "critical section" naming came from the code that was
from the latency tracer days of the real time patch (pre-ftrace). The
irqsoff tracer has the least modification from the original code, and
probably should be rewritten one of these days.
-- Steve
Powered by blists - more mailing lists