Re: [PATCH 3/3] context_tracking,x86: remove extraneous irq disable & enable from context tracking on syscall entry

[Ingo Molnar]

* Rik van Riel <riel@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On 05/07/2015 08:29 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > 
> > * Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > 
> >>>> We cannot take the lock_trace(task) from irq context, and we 
> >>>> probably do not need to anyway, since we do not care about a 
> >>>> precise stack trace for the task.
> >>>
> >>> So one worry with this and similar approaches of statistically 
> >>> detecting user mode would be the fact that on the way out to 
> >>> user-space we don't really destroy the previous call trace - we 
> >>> just pop off the stack (non-destructively), restore RIPs and are 
> >>> gone.
> >>>
> >>> We'll need that percpu flag I suspect.
> >>
> >> Note we have the context tracking state which tells where the 
> >> current task is: user/system/guest.
> > 
> > Yes, but that overhead is what I'm suggesting we get rid of, I thought 
> > Rik was trying to find a mechanism that would be independent of that?
> 
> One thing at a time :)
> 
> I am working on the timer sampling stuff, which should be easy to 
> adapt to a different user/system/guest/irq/softirq/... tracking 
> thing, if somebody else comes up with a more efficient way to do 
> that.

So if you make the timer sampling use a percpu variable, and set that 
variable from the existing callbacks, then we could do this gradually: 
first the timer sampling uses the flag, then RCU could use it, and 
finally we could push it out to minimal assembly code.

But it's important to start out with a percpu flag to track this all.

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
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/