[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20201021154456.GM3249@paulmck-ThinkPad-P72>
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 08:44:56 -0700
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: Zong Li <zong.li@...ive.com>, josh@...htriplett.org,
mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com, jiangshanlai@...il.com,
joel@...lfernandes.org, vincent.whitchurch@...s.com,
tglx@...utronix.de, paul.walmsley@...ive.com,
palmerdabbelt@...gle.com, guoren@...nel.org, atishp@...shpatra.org,
mhiramat@...nel.org, greentime.hu@...ive.com,
colin.king@...onical.com, rcu@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] stop_machine: Mark functions as notrace
On Wed, Oct 21, 2020 at 10:15:22AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Oct 2020 10:12:16 -0400
> Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> wrote:
>
> > > Fixes: 4ecf0a43e729 ("processor: get rid of cpu_relax_yield")
> > > Fixes: 366237e7b083 ("stop_machine: Provide RCU quiescent state in
> > > multi_cpu_stop()")
> >
> > I really do not like to add "notrace" to core functions because a single
> > architecture has issues with it. Why does RISCV have problems with these
> > functions but no other architecture does?
> >
> > NACK from me until it is shown that these are issues for a broader set of
> > architectures.
>
> After looking at the two above fixes, I take back my NACK ;-)
>
> One of them duplicates an already notraced function, so that looks fine.
> The other makes a static function global, which could cause issues as well.
>
> After further review:
>
> Acked-by: Steven Rostedt (VMware) <rostedt@...dmis.org>
If someone else would like to take this:
Acked-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...nel.org>
Or let me know if you would like me to take it, target v5.11.
Thanx, Paul
Powered by blists - more mailing lists