Re: [RFC PATCH v2 8/8] sched, smp: Trace smp callback causing an IPI
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- To: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 8/8] sched, smp: Trace smp callback causing an IPI
- From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2022 10:12:43 +0100
- Cc: linux-alpha@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-snps-arc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-csky@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-hexagon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-ia64@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, loongarch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-mips@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, openrisc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-parisc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linuxppc-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-riscv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-s390@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-sh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, sparclinux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-xtensa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, x86@xxxxxxxxxx, "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxx>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@xxxxxxxxxx>, Daniel Bristot de Oliveira <bristot@xxxxxxxxxx>, Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@xxxxxxxxxx>, Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@xxxxxxxxxx>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>, Borislav Petkov <bp@xxxxxxxxx>, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx>, Marc Zyngier <maz@xxxxxxxxxx>, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@xxxxxxx>, Russell King <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@xxxxxxxxx>, Guo Ren <guoren@xxxxxxxxxx>, "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- In-reply-to: <xhsmhfsehy706.mognet@vschneid.remote.csb>
- References: <20221102182949.3119584-1-vschneid@redhat.com> <20221102183336.3120536-7-vschneid@redhat.com> <Y3ZBUMteJysc1/lA@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <xhsmhfsehy706.mognet@vschneid.remote.csb>
On Thu, Nov 17, 2022 at 02:45:29PM +0000, Valentin Schneider wrote:
> > + if (trace_ipi_send_cpumask_enabled()) {
> > + call_single_data_t *csd;
> > + smp_call_func_t func;
> > +
> > + csd = container_of(node, call_single_data_t, node.llist);
> > +
> > + func = sched_ttwu_pending;
> > + if (CSD_TYPE(csd) != CSD_TYPE_TTWU)
> > + func = csd->func;
> > +
> > + if (raw_smp_call_single_queue(cpu, node))
> > + trace_ipi_send_cpumask(cpumask_of(cpu), _RET_IP_, func);
>
> So I went with the tracepoint being placed *before* the actual IPI gets
> sent to have a somewhat sane ordering between trace_ipi_send_cpumask() and
> e.g. trace_call_function_single_entry().
>
> Packaging the call_single_queue logic makes the code less horrible, but it
> does mix up the event ordering...
Keeps em sharp ;-)
> > + return;
> > + }
> > +
> > + raw_smp_call_single_queue(cpu, node);
> > }
> >
> > /*
> > @@ -983,10 +1017,13 @@ static void smp_call_function_many_cond(
> > * number of CPUs might be zero due to concurrent changes to the
> > * provided mask.
> > */
> > - if (nr_cpus == 1)
> > + if (nr_cpus == 1) {
> > + trace_ipi_send_cpumask(cpumask_of(last_cpu), _RET_IP_, func);
> > send_call_function_single_ipi(last_cpu);
>
> This'll yield an IPI event even if no IPI is sent due to the idle task
> polling, no?
Oh, right..
[Index of Archives]
[Linux Kernel]
[Sparc Linux]
[DCCP]
[Linux ARM]
[Yosemite News]
[Linux SCSI]
[Linux x86_64]
[Linux for Ham Radio]