[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJ6HWG6x4WgLtr3RGNar4jFoccD4bCocid-_WzSFofDRP8+2gA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2023 01:10:08 -0300
From: Leonardo Bras Soares Passos <leobras@...hat.com>
To: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
Nadav Amit <namit@...are.com>,
Chen Zhongjin <chenzhongjin@...wei.com>,
Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@...nel.org>,
Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>,
Yury Norov <yury.norov@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v4 1/2] trace,smp: Add tracepoints around remotelly
called functions
Hello Valentin, thanks for the feedback!
On Tue, May 30, 2023 at 7:36 AM Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> On 15/05/23 15:30, Leonardo Bras wrote:
> > @@ -375,7 +386,7 @@ static int generic_exec_single(int cpu, call_single_data_t *csd)
> > csd_lock_record(csd);
> > csd_unlock(csd);
> > local_irq_save(flags);
> > - func(info);
> > + csd_do_func(func, info, csd);
>
> I'd suggest making this match the local case of
> smp_call_function_many_cond(), IOW pass NULL as the csd when executing
> locally.
Sure, done!
>
> IMO this is required for postprocessing with e.g. synthetic events for CSD
> delivery measurement, otherwise we'll try to match this execution with a
> previous CSD enqueue.
>
> > csd_lock_record(NULL);
> > local_irq_restore(flags);
> > return 0;
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists