Re: [Question] Hooks for scheduler tracing (CFS)

[Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo]

Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
> Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>   
> > [...]
> > The problem is also in _stp_print_flush, not *only* in relay code:
> > void _stp_print_flush (void)
> > ...
> >                 spin_lock(&_stp_print_lock);
> >                 ...
> >                 spin_unlock(&_stp_print_lock);
> >
> > Those will turn into mutexes with -rt.
> >     
>
> Indeed, plus systemtap-generated locking code uses rwlocks,
> local_irq_save/restore or preempt_disable, in various places.  Could
> someone point to a place that spells out what would be more
> appropriate way of ensuring atomicity while being compatible with -rt?
>   

https://ols2006.108.redhat.com/2007/Reprints/rostedt-Reprint.pdf

And his slides too, haven't checked if they are already only at the OLS 
site.

- Arnaldo
-
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/