[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220715095156.12a3a0e3@gandalf.local.home>
Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2022 09:51:56 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>
Cc: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
John Ogness <john.ogness@...utronix.de>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org>,
kasan-dev@...glegroups.com, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@...el.com>,
Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@...aro.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Linux Kernel Functional Testing <lkft@...aro.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] printk: Make console tracepoint safe in NMI() context
On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 14:39:52 +0200
Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com> wrote:
> Couldn't this just use rcu_is_watching()?
>
> | * rcu_is_watching - see if RCU thinks that the current CPU is not idle
Maybe, but I was thinking that Petr had a way to hit the issue that we
worry about. But since the non _rcuide() call requires rcu watching,
prehaps that is better to use.
-- Steve
Powered by blists - more mailing lists