Re: [PATCH 3/3] x86/ftrace: Use text_poke()

From: Alexei Starovoitov
Date: Mon Oct 21 2019 - 20:37:12 EST


On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 6:45 AM Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 4 Oct 2019 13:22:37 +0200
> Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Oct 03, 2019 at 06:10:45PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > > But still, we are going from 120 to 660 IPIs for every CPU. Not saying
> > > it's a problem, but something that we should note. Someone (those that
> > > don't like kernel interference) may complain.
> >
> > It is machine wide function tracing, interference is going to happen..
> > :-)
> >
> > Anyway, we can grow the batch size if sufficient benefit can be shown to
> > exist.
>
> Yeah, I was thinking that we just go with these patches and then fix
> the IPI issue when someone starts complaining ;-)
>
> Anyway, is this series ready to go? I can pull them in (I guess I
> should get an ack from Thomas or Ingo as they are x86 specific). I'm
> currently working on code that affects the same code paths as this
> patch, and would like to build my changes on top of this, instead of
> monkeying around with major conflicts.

What is the status of this set ?
Steven, did you apply it ?