From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [for-next][PATCH 2/5] tracing: Add set_event_pid directory for future use
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2015 23:17:26 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20151119231726.5362295f@grimm.local.home> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20151119232427.GZ5184@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
On Thu, 19 Nov 2015 15:24:27 -0800
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> > +static void *p_start(struct seq_file *m, loff_t *pos)
> > +{
> > + struct trace_pid_list *pid_list;
> > + struct trace_array *tr = m->private;
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * Grab the mutex, to keep calls to p_next() having the same
> > + * tr->filtered_pids as p_start() has.
> > + * If we just passed the tr->filtered_pids around, then RCU would
> > + * have been enough, but doing that makes things more complex.
> > + */
> > + mutex_lock(&event_mutex);
> > + rcu_read_lock_sched();
>
> This looks interesting... You hold the mutex, which I am guessing
> blocks changes. Then why the need for rcu_read_lock_sched()?
Technically you are correct. It's not needed. But I added it more for
documentation :-)
Ideally, we wouldn't need the mutex here. But then we need to pass
around the pid_list which makes it a bit more complex in the seq_file
code than to pass around the tr (where we get pid_list from
tr->filtered_pids).
And we do multiple rcu_dereference_sched()s, and for this code to work
properly (give consistent output), the result should be the same.
Hence, we grab the mutex, to keep the tr->filtered_pids to be
consistent between the rcu_dereference_sched() calls, but since we are
not modifying tr->filtered_pids(), and if we changed this code to do a
single rcu_dereference_sched() and pass around the result, then we
wouldn't need to grab the mutex, and the rcu_read_lock_sched() would be
enough.
I could remove it and change the code to do rcu_dereferenced_lock() but
to me that makes it sound like this code is an update path, which it is
not.
Does this make sense in a crazy way?
-- Steve
>
> Thanx, Paul
>
> > +
> > + pid_list = rcu_dereference_sched(tr->filtered_pids);
> > +
> > + if (!pid_list || *pos >= pid_list->nr_pids)
> > + return NULL;
> > +
> > + return (void *)&pid_list->pids[*pos];
> > +}
> > +
> > +static void p_stop(struct seq_file *m, void *p)
> > +{
> > + rcu_read_unlock_sched();
> > + mutex_unlock(&event_mutex);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static void *
> > +p_next(struct seq_file *m, void *v, loff_t *pos)
> > +{
> > + struct trace_array *tr = m->private;
> > + struct trace_pid_list *pid_list = rcu_dereference_sched(tr->filtered_pids);
> > +
> > + (*pos)++;
> > +
> > + if (*pos >= pid_list->nr_pids)
> > + return NULL;
> > +
> > + return (void *)&pid_list->pids[*pos];
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int p_show(struct seq_file *m, void *v)
> > +{
> > + pid_t *pid = v;
> > +
> > + seq_printf(m, "%d\n", *pid);
> > + return 0;
> > +}
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-11-20 4:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-10-29 7:07 [for-next][PATCH 0/5] tracing: Addition of set_event_pid Steven Rostedt
2015-10-29 7:07 ` [for-next][PATCH 1/5] tracepoint: Give priority to probes of tracepoints Steven Rostedt
2015-10-29 17:52 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2015-10-30 20:25 ` Steven Rostedt
2015-10-30 20:49 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2015-10-29 7:07 ` [for-next][PATCH 2/5] tracing: Add set_event_pid directory for future use Steven Rostedt
2015-11-19 23:24 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-11-20 4:17 ` Steven Rostedt [this message]
2015-12-01 18:12 ` Paul E. McKenney
2015-10-29 7:07 ` [for-next][PATCH 3/5] tracing: Implement event pid filtering Steven Rostedt
2015-10-29 7:07 ` [for-next][PATCH 4/5] tracing: Check all tasks on each CPU when filtering pids Steven Rostedt
2015-10-30 6:16 ` Jiaxing Wang
2015-10-30 20:28 ` Steven Rostedt
2015-10-29 7:07 ` [for-next][PATCH 5/5] tracing: Fix sparse RCU warning Steven Rostedt
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20151119231726.5362295f@grimm.local.home \
--to=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®