Markers: multi-probe locking fun (was: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Markers Implementation for RCU Tracing - Ver II)

!MAILaRCHIVE_VOTE_RePLACE
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: <paulmck@...>
Cc: <prasad@...>, <linux-kernel@...>, <mingo@...>, Gautham R Shenoy <ego@...>, <mathieu.desnoyers@...>, <linux-rt-users@...>, <dipankar@...>
Date: Tuesday, February 19, 2008 - 12:27 pm

Paul E. McKenney wrote:

You mean something like "#define call_sched call_rcu_classic"?

I just learned that there is another reason for killing
rcu_read_lock&friends from the marker probes: It can deadlock on -rt
with PREEMPT_RCU_BOOST (hit probe inside rq-lock protected region =>
rcu_read_unlock triggers unboost => stuck on rq_lock :( ).

Jan

-- 
Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT SE 2
Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux
--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Re: [PATCH 2/2] Markers Implementation for Preempt RCU Boost..., Mathieu Desnoyers, (Thu Jan 3, 12:30 pm)
Markers: multi-probe locking fun (was: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Marke..., Jan Kiszka, (Tue Feb 19, 12:27 pm)
Re: Markers: multi-probe locking fun (was: Re: [PATCH 0/2] M..., Mathieu Desnoyers, (Tue Feb 19, 6:03 pm)
Re: Markers: multi-probe locking fun (was: Re: [PATCH 0/2] M..., Mathieu Desnoyers, (Tue Feb 19, 4:33 pm)
Re: Markers: multi-probe locking fun (was: Re: [PATCH 0/2] M..., Mathieu Desnoyers, (Tue Feb 19, 6:32 pm)
Re: [PATCH 0/2] Markers Implementation for RCU Tracing - Ver..., Mathieu Desnoyers, (Mon Feb 18, 4:41 pm)
Re: [PATCH 2/2] Markers Implementation for Preempt RCU Boost..., Mathieu Desnoyers, (Mon Jan 14, 11:35 am)
Re: [PATCH 2/2] Markers Implementation for Preempt RCU Boost..., Mathieu Desnoyers, (Mon Jan 14, 3:36 pm)