[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <09c76498-6a0b-4880-8a86-2a295c47c703@efficios.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2025 23:19:41 -0500
From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>
Cc: Joel Fernandes <joelagnelf@...dia.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
"bpf@...r.kernel.org" <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] tracing: Guard __DECLARE_TRACE() use of
__DO_TRACE_CALL() with SRCU-fast
On 2025-12-12 21:18, Steven Rostedt wrote:
[...]
>
> Thus, I'm going to keep this a PREEMPT_RT only change. If someone can
> come in and convince us that the PREEMPT_RT way is also beneficial for
> the non-RT case then we can make it consistent again. Until then, this
> change is focusing on fixing PREEMPT_RT, and that's what the patch is
> going to be limited to.
Here is one additional thing to keep in mind: although
SRCU-fast is probably quite fast (as the name implies),
last time I tried using migrate disable in a fast path
I was surprised to see verbosity of the generated assembly,
and how slow it was compared to preempt disable.
So before using migrate disable on a fast path, at least on
non-preempt-RT configs, we should carefully consider the
performance impact of migrate disable.
Thanks,
Mathieu
--
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
https://www.efficios.com
Powered by blists - more mailing lists