From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To: Petr Pavlu <petr.pavlu@suse.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Trace Kernel <linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ring-buffer: Have the buffer update counter be atomic
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2024 10:48:47 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20241011104848.7f5b180b@gandalf.local.home> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20241011100132.456f903a@gandalf.local.home>
On Fri, 11 Oct 2024 10:01:32 -0400
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote:
> > Sorry for not replying to your last comment on my patch, I was ill.
> >
> > The member ring_buffer_per_cpu.cnt is intended to be accessed under the
> > reader_lock, same as the pages pointer which it is tied to, so this
> > change shouldn't be strictly needed.
> >
>
> Right, but there was one location that the cnt was updated outside the
> lock. The one I commented on. But instead of adding a lock around it, I
> decided to just make it an atomic. Then there would be no need for the
> lock. Hmm, it still needs a memory barrier though. At least a
> smp_mb__after_atomic().
Hmm, I don't like how the update in ring_buffer_subbuf_order_set() is
unprotected. I think this is the proper patch:
diff --git a/kernel/trace/ring_buffer.c b/kernel/trace/ring_buffer.c
index 696d422d5b35..0672df07b599 100644
--- a/kernel/trace/ring_buffer.c
+++ b/kernel/trace/ring_buffer.c
@@ -6774,6 +6774,7 @@ int ring_buffer_subbuf_order_set(struct trace_buffer *buffer, int order)
}
for_each_buffer_cpu(buffer, cpu) {
+ unsigned long flags;
if (!cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, buffer->cpumask))
continue;
@@ -6800,11 +6801,15 @@ int ring_buffer_subbuf_order_set(struct trace_buffer *buffer, int order)
struct buffer_page, list);
list_del_init(&cpu_buffer->reader_page->list);
+ /* Synchronize with rb_check_pages() */
+ raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&cpu_buffer->reader_lock, flags);
+
/* The cpu_buffer pages are a link list with no head */
cpu_buffer->pages = cpu_buffer->new_pages.next;
cpu_buffer->new_pages.next->prev = cpu_buffer->new_pages.prev;
cpu_buffer->new_pages.prev->next = cpu_buffer->new_pages.next;
cpu_buffer->cnt++;
+ raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&cpu_buffer->reader_lock, flags);
/* Clear the new_pages list */
INIT_LIST_HEAD(&cpu_buffer->new_pages);
Even though it's also protected by the buffer->mutex, I feel more
comfortable with this.
-- Steve
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-10-11 14:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-10-10 23:58 Steven Rostedt
2024-10-11 8:05 ` Petr Pavlu
2024-10-11 14:01 ` Steven Rostedt
2024-10-11 14:48 ` Steven Rostedt [this message]
2024-10-11 15:20 ` Petr Pavlu
2024-10-11 16:44 ` Steven Rostedt
2024-10-11 16:53 ` 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=20241011104848.7f5b180b@gandalf.local.home \
--to=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=mhiramat@kernel.org \
--cc=petr.pavlu@suse.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®