Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/5] Introduce checks for preemptable code forthis_cpu_read/write()

[Steven Rostedt]

On Tue, 2011-09-20 at 18:17 -0400, Valdis.Kletnieks@xxxxxx wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Sep 2011 11:19:47 EDT, Steven Rostedt said:
> > On Tue, 2011-09-20 at 09:57 -0500, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> > 
> > > this_cpu_xx functions are made for those locations that have
> > > preemption enabled. If you can use those function (classic case is a
> > > per cpu counter increment in the network subsystem) then you can avoid
> > > preempt disable/enable or get_cpu/put_cpu.
> > 
> > If the variables are used for a very short time, then the latencies
> > introduced by a simple:
> > 
> > 	var = get_cpu_var(my_var);
> > 	if (var)
> > 		do_something_quick();
> > 	put_cpu_var(my_var);
> > 
> > Otherwise if that do_something_quick(); migrates, it may be doing
> > something it shouldn't be doing!
> 
> This has the added advantage of making the calling function take the blame
> in latency traces, doesn't it?

Yes, the preempt off latency tracer would detect the above, if it took
too long.

-- Steve


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/