[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAP-5=fUBr60o22P4Op-J=TPkdfnby9vLetHQZ4UqjuX+nvbG9w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2023 10:27:56 -0800
From: Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>
To: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
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@...nel.org>,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
Nick Terrell <terrelln@...com>,
Kan Liang <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>,
Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
Kajol Jain <kjain@...ux.ibm.com>,
Athira Rajeev <atrajeev@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@...nel.org>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
Vincent Whitchurch <vincent.whitchurch@...s.com>,
"Steinar H. Gunderson" <sesse@...gle.com>,
Liam Howlett <liam.howlett@...cle.com>,
Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>,
Colin Ian King <colin.i.king@...il.com>,
Dmitrii Dolgov <9erthalion6@...il.com>,
Yang Jihong <yangjihong1@...wei.com>,
Ming Wang <wangming01@...ngson.cn>,
James Clark <james.clark@....com>,
K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@....com>,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
Leo Yan <leo.yan@...aro.org>,
Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@....com>,
German Gomez <german.gomez@....com>,
Changbin Du <changbin.du@...wei.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>, Li Dong <lidong@...o.com>,
Sandipan Das <sandipan.das@....com>,
liuwenyu <liuwenyu7@...wei.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org,
Guilherme Amadio <amadio@...too.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 01/50] perf comm: Use regular mutex
On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 4:56 PM Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 2:09 PM Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com> wrote:
> >
> > The rwsem is only after used for writing so switch to a mutex that has
> > better error checking.
> >
> > Fixes: 7a8f349e9d14 ("perf rwsem: Add debug mode that uses a mutex")
>
> I think we talked about fixing this separately, no?
Sorry, I'm unclear on an action to do. Currently changing the
RWS_ERRORCHECK in tools/perf/util/rwsem.h will break the build without
this change.
> > Signed-off-by: Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>
> > ---
> > tools/perf/util/comm.c | 10 +++++-----
> > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/tools/perf/util/comm.c b/tools/perf/util/comm.c
> > index afb8d4fd2644..4ae7bc2aa9a6 100644
> > --- a/tools/perf/util/comm.c
> > +++ b/tools/perf/util/comm.c
> > @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ struct comm_str {
> >
> > /* Should perhaps be moved to struct machine */
> > static struct rb_root comm_str_root;
> > -static struct rw_semaphore comm_str_lock = {.lock = PTHREAD_RWLOCK_INITIALIZER,};
> > +static struct mutex comm_str_lock = {.lock = PTHREAD_ERRORCHECK_MUTEX_INITIALIZER_NP,};
>
> IIUC it has a problem with musl libc. Actually I think it's better to
> hide the field and the pthread initializer under some macro like
> MUTEX_INITIALIZER or DEFINE_MUTEX() like in the kernel.
Will there be enough use to justify this? I think ideally we'd not be
having global locks needing global initializers as we run into
problems like we see in metrics needing to mix counting and sampling.
Thanks,
Ian
> Thanks,
> Namhyung
>
> >
> > static struct comm_str *comm_str__get(struct comm_str *cs)
> > {
> > @@ -30,9 +30,9 @@ static struct comm_str *comm_str__get(struct comm_str *cs)
> > static void comm_str__put(struct comm_str *cs)
> > {
> > if (cs && refcount_dec_and_test(&cs->refcnt)) {
> > - down_write(&comm_str_lock);
> > + mutex_lock(&comm_str_lock);
> > rb_erase(&cs->rb_node, &comm_str_root);
> > - up_write(&comm_str_lock);
> > + mutex_unlock(&comm_str_lock);
> > zfree(&cs->str);
> > free(cs);
> > }
> > @@ -98,9 +98,9 @@ static struct comm_str *comm_str__findnew(const char *str, struct rb_root *root)
> > {
> > struct comm_str *cs;
> >
> > - down_write(&comm_str_lock);
> > + mutex_lock(&comm_str_lock);
> > cs = __comm_str__findnew(str, root);
> > - up_write(&comm_str_lock);
> > + mutex_unlock(&comm_str_lock);
> >
> > return cs;
> > }
> > --
> > 2.43.0.rc1.413.gea7ed67945-goog
> >
Powered by blists - more mailing lists