[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20231121094444.04701bdc@gandalf.local.home>
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2023 09:44:44 -0500
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.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, 21 Nov 2023 15:36:47 +0100
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
>
> Still utterly confused about what task-tracing rcu is and how it is
> different from preemptible rcu.
Is this similar to synchronize_rcu_tasks()? As I understand that one (grace
period continues until all tasks have voluntarily scheduled or gone into
user space). But I'm a bit confused by synchronize_rcu_tasks_trace()?
Note, that for syncronize_rcu_tasks() the critical sections must not call
schedule (although it is OK to be preempted).
-- Steve
Powered by blists - more mailing lists