From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753373Ab3AHU0O (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Jan 2013 15:26:14 -0500 Received: from hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com ([71.74.56.122]:9151 "EHLO hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751031Ab3AHU0N (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Jan 2013 15:26:13 -0500 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.0 cv=Jaw+XD2V c=1 sm=0 a=rXTBtCOcEpjy1lPqhTCpEQ==:17 a=mNMOxpOpBa8A:10 a=S0zgfAou480A:10 a=5SG0PmZfjMsA:10 a=Q9fys5e9bTEA:10 a=meVymXHHAAAA:8 a=-V7fij46oSQA:10 a=J0lIusKqhG1g-MNCFQsA:9 a=PUjeQqilurYA:10 a=rXTBtCOcEpjy1lPqhTCpEQ==:117 X-Cloudmark-Score: 0 X-Authenticated-User: X-Originating-IP: 74.67.115.198 Message-ID: <1357676771.5190.29.camel@gandalf.local.home> Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/33] cputime: Generic on-demand virtual cputime accounting From: Steven Rostedt To: Frederic Weisbecker Cc: LKML , Alessio Igor Bogani , Andrew Morton , Chris Metcalf , Christoph Lameter , Geoff Levand , Gilad Ben Yossef , Hakan Akkan , Ingo Molnar , Li Zhong , Namhyung Kim , "Paul E. McKenney" , Paul Gortmaker , Peter Zijlstra , Thomas Gleixner Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2013 15:26:11 -0500 In-Reply-To: <1357610913-1080-4-git-send-email-fweisbec@gmail.com> References: <1357610913-1080-1-git-send-email-fweisbec@gmail.com> <1357610913-1080-4-git-send-email-fweisbec@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-15" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.4.4-1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2013-01-08 at 03:08 +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > diff --git a/kernel/context_tracking.c b/kernel/context_tracking.c > index c952770..bd461ad 100644 > --- a/kernel/context_tracking.c > +++ b/kernel/context_tracking.c > @@ -56,7 +56,7 @@ void user_enter(void) > local_irq_save(flags); > if (__this_cpu_read(context_tracking.active) && > __this_cpu_read(context_tracking.state) != IN_USER) { > - __this_cpu_write(context_tracking.state, IN_USER); > + vtime_user_enter(current); > /* > * At this stage, only low level arch entry code remains and > * then we'll run in userspace. We can assume there won't be > @@ -65,6 +65,7 @@ void user_enter(void) > * on the tick. > */ > rcu_user_enter(); Hmm, the rcu_user_enter() can do quite a bit. Too bad we are accounting it as user time. I wonder if we could move the vtime_user_enter() below it. But then if vtime_user_enter() calls rcu_read_lock() it breaks. The notorious chicken vs egg ordeal! -- Steve > + __this_cpu_write(context_tracking.state, IN_USER); > } > local_irq_restore(flags); > } > @@ -90,12 +91,13 @@ void user_exit(void) > > local_irq_save(flags); > if (__this_cpu_read(context_tracking.state) == IN_USER) { > - __this_cpu_write(context_tracking.state, IN_KERNEL); > /* > * We are going to run code that may use RCU. Inform > * RCU core about that (ie: we may need the tick again). > */ > rcu_user_exit(); > + vtime_user_exit(current); > + __this_cpu_write(context_tracking.state, IN_KERNEL); > } > local_irq_restore(flags); > }