[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200213082814.GJ14897@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2020 09:28:14 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
rostedt@...dmis.org, mingo@...nel.org, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
gustavo@...eddedor.com, tglx@...utronix.de, paulmck@...nel.org,
josh@...htriplett.org, mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com,
jiangshanlai@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/9] rcu,tracing: Create trace_rcu_{enter,exit}()
On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 06:27:02PM -0500, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 10:01:42PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > +#define trace_rcu_enter() \
> > +({ \
> > + unsigned long state = 0; \
> > + if (!rcu_is_watching()) { \
> > + if (in_nmi()) { \
> > + state = __TR_NMI; \
> > + rcu_nmi_enter(); \
> > + } else { \
> > + state = __TR_IRQ; \
> > + rcu_irq_enter_irqsave(); \
>
> Since rcu_irq_enter_irqsave can be called from a tracer context, should those
> be marked with notrace as well? AFAICS, there's no notrace marking on them.
It should work, these functions are re-entrant (as are IRQs / NMIs) and
Steve wants to be able to trace RCU itself.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists