[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230310104458.4f3b1343@gandalf.local.home>
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2023 10:44:58 -0500
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: "Masami Hiramatsu (Google)" <mhiramat@...nel.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Trace Kernel <linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tracing: Make tracepoint lockdep check actually test
something
On Fri, 10 Mar 2023 17:27:58 +0900
Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@...nel.org> wrote:
> This check has been introduced by commit 3a630178fd5f ("tracing: generate RCU
> warnings even when tracepoints are disabled"), and it also added a comment
> above this macro.
>
> * When lockdep is enabled, we make sure to always do the RCU portions of
> * the tracepoint code, regardless of whether tracing is on. However,
> * don't check if the condition is false, due to interaction with idle
> * instrumentation. This lets us find RCU issues triggered with tracepoints
> * even when this tracepoint is off. This code has no purpose other than
> * poking RCU a bit.
>
> I think at least the last sentence will be outdated by this fix.
Ah thanks, I forgot to update that part. What about:
* When lockdep is enabled, we make sure to always test if RCU is
* "watching" regardless if the tracepoint is enabled or not. Tracepoints
* require RCU to be active, and it should always warn at the tracepoint
* site if it is not watching, as it will need to be active when the
* tracepoint is enabled.
?
-- Steve
Powered by blists - more mailing lists