[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20231121155256.GN4779@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2023 16:52:56 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Michael Jeanson <mjeanson@...icios.com>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/5] tracing: Introduce faultable tracepoints
On Tue, Nov 21, 2023 at 03:46:43PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> Why is this such a hard question?
Anyway, recapping from IRC:
preemptible, SRCU:
counter-array based, GP advances by increasing array index
and waiting for previous index to drop to 0.
notably, a GP can pass while a task is preempted but not within a
critical section.
SRCU has smp_mb() in the critical sections to improve GP.
tasks:
waits for every task to pass schedule()
ensures that any pieces of text rendered unreachable before, is
actually unused after.
tasks-rude:
like tasks, but different? build to handle tracing while rcu-idle,
even though that was already deemed bad?
tasks-tracing-rcu:
extention of tasks to have critical-sections ? Should this simply be
tasks?
Can someone complete, please?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists