[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20180711151559.GR3593@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2018 08:15:59 -0700
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@....com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Julia Cartwright <julia@...com>,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
Thomas Glexiner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Tom Zanussi <tom.zanussi@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 4/7] tracepoint: Make rcuidle tracepoint callers use
SRCU
On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 10:46:18AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Jul 2018 07:27:44 -0700
> "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 09:00:03AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > > On Wed, 11 Jul 2018 14:49:54 +0200
> > > Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 11:21:46AM -0700, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> > > > > - it_func_ptr = rcu_dereference_sched((tp)->funcs); \
> > > >
> > > > I would convert to rcu_dereference_raw() to appease sparse. The fancy
> > > > stuff below is pointless if you then turn off all checking.
> > >
> > > The problem with doing this is if we use a trace event without the
> > > proper _idle() or whatever, we wont get a warning that it is used
> > > incorrectly with lockdep. Or does lockdep still check if "rcu is
> > > watching" with rcu_dereference_raw()?
> >
> > No lockdep checking is done by rcu_dereference_raw().
>
> Correct, but I think we can do this regardless. So Joel please resend
> with Peter's suggestion.
>
> The reason being is because of this:
>
>
> #define __DECLARE_TRACE(name, proto, args, cond, data_proto, data_args) \
> extern struct tracepoint __tracepoint_##name; \
> static inline void trace_##name(proto) \
> { \
> if (static_key_false(&__tracepoint_##name.key)) \
> __DO_TRACE(&__tracepoint_##name, \
> TP_PROTO(data_proto), \
> TP_ARGS(data_args), \
> TP_CONDITION(cond), 0); \
> if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_LOCKDEP) && (cond)) { \
> rcu_read_lock_sched_notrace(); \
> rcu_dereference_sched(__tracepoint_##name.funcs);\
> rcu_read_unlock_sched_notrace(); \
> } \
> }
>
> Because lockdep would only trigger warnings when the tracepoint was
> enabled and used in a place it shouldn't be, we added the above
> IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_LOCKDEP) part to test regardless if the the
> tracepoint was enabled or not. Because we do this, we don't need to
> have the test in the __DO_TRACE() code itself. That means we can clean
> up the code as per Peter's suggestion.
Indeed, the rcu_dereference_sched() would catch it in that case, so
agreed, Peter's suggestion isn't losing any debuggability.
Thanx, Paul
Powered by blists - more mailing lists