Re: [PATCH v5 01/50] perf comm: Use regular mutex

From: Namhyung Kim
Date: Sat Dec 02 2023 - 18:55:15 EST


On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 10:28 AM Ian Rogers <irogers@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 4:56 PM Namhyung Kim <namhyung@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 2:09 PM Ian Rogers <irogers@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > The rwsem is only after used for writing so switch to a mutex that has
> > > better error checking.
> > >
> > > Fixes: 7a8f349e9d14 ("perf rwsem: Add debug mode that uses a mutex")
> >
> > I think we talked about fixing this separately, no?
>
> Sorry, I'm unclear on an action to do. Currently changing the
> RWS_ERRORCHECK in tools/perf/util/rwsem.h will break the build without
> this change.

Can it be like this?

#ifdef RWS_ERRORCHECK
#define RWSEM_INITIALIZER { .lock = PTHREAD_MUTEX_INITIALIZER, }
#else
#define RWSEM_INITIALIZER { .lock = PTHREAD_RWLOCK_INITIALIZER, }
#endif

>
> > > Signed-off-by: Ian Rogers <irogers@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > tools/perf/util/comm.c | 10 +++++-----
> > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/tools/perf/util/comm.c b/tools/perf/util/comm.c
> > > index afb8d4fd2644..4ae7bc2aa9a6 100644
> > > --- a/tools/perf/util/comm.c
> > > +++ b/tools/perf/util/comm.c
> > > @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ struct comm_str {
> > >
> > > /* Should perhaps be moved to struct machine */
> > > static struct rb_root comm_str_root;
> > > -static struct rw_semaphore comm_str_lock = {.lock = PTHREAD_RWLOCK_INITIALIZER,};
> > > +static struct mutex comm_str_lock = {.lock = PTHREAD_ERRORCHECK_MUTEX_INITIALIZER_NP,};
> >
> > IIUC it has a problem with musl libc. Actually I think it's better to
> > hide the field and the pthread initializer under some macro like
> > MUTEX_INITIALIZER or DEFINE_MUTEX() like in the kernel.
>
> Will there be enough use to justify this? I think ideally we'd not be
> having global locks needing global initializers as we run into
> problems like we see in metrics needing to mix counting and sampling.

I don't know but there might be a reason to use global locks.
Then we need to support the initialization and it'd be better
to make it easier to handle internal changes like this.

Thanks,
Namhyung