[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20181019012750.GD89903@joelaf.mtv.corp.google.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2018 18:27:50 -0700
From: Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.ibm.com>,
Nikolay Borisov <nborisov@...e.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] doc: rcu: remove obsolete (non-)requirement about
disabling preemption
On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 09:12:45PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Oct 2018 17:19:32 -0700
> "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> > I figured that whoever calls preempt_enable_no_resched() is taking the
> > responsibility for permitting preemption in the near future, and if they
> > fail to do so, they will get called on it. Hard to hide from the latency
> > tracer, after all. ;-)
>
> Correct, and doing a search of preempt_enable_no_resched() I see
> there's one in the ftrace ring buffer code, that was added a long time
> ago (2008) to fix a recursion bug that no longer exists, and this now
> can leak a preemption point.
>
> I'll have to go fix that :-(
Cool! Glad you found this issue in the code while we are discussing it ;)
thanks,
- Joel
Powered by blists - more mailing lists