lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [May]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 3/3] ring-buffer: make cpu buffer entries counter atomic

On Fri, 1 May 2009, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > > > the counter too. This would cause missing entries to be added.
> > > >
> > > > > - unsigned long entries;
> > > > > + atomic_t entries;
> > > >
> > > > Hm, that's not really good as atomics can be rather expensive and
> > > > this is the fastpath.
> > >
> > > Actually, it could be local_t. I used that in a lot of the other places.
> > > The race is with on CPU not other CPUs, and on archs like x86 there
> > > is not cost of the "LOCK".
> >
> > Ug, it must be atomic_t. It is also modified by the reader. Thus
> > it is not only a race with a single CPU but also multiple CPUs.
> >
> > This means that interrupts disabled is not the only proctection it
> > needs. It must either be an atomic, or protected by a spinlock.
>
> Trace buffers are rather fundamentally per cpu. Where's the problem?

The entries keeps track of the number of entries in the buffer. A writer
(producer) adds to the counter and readers (consumers) subtract from them.
A writer can subtract them if it overwrites a page before the producer
consumes it.

Only the writers are pinned to a CPU, the readers happen on any CPU.

-- Steve



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-05-01 18:35    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans