lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Jun]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/3] printk: Release console_sem after logbuf_lock
From
Date
On Fri, 2011-06-10 at 14:41 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-06-10 at 14:34 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > * Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
> >
> > > thinking that that would have my printk stmts appear on both the
> > > fbcon as well as the serial line. But they fail to appear on the
> > > latency tracer (current max was 165us waking an idle cpu).
> >
> > Have you removed this bit:
> >
> > spin_unlock(&logbuf_lock);
> > stop_critical_timings(); /* don't trace print latency */
> > call_console_drivers(_con_start, _log_end);
> > start_critical_timings();
> > local_irq_restore(flags);
> >
> > which hides the latencies from the latency tracer?
>
> it shouldn't those flags come from spin_lock_irqsave(), which already
> has IRQs disabled, so the restore shouldn't re-enable them.
>
> Hmm,. that might actually already be true for mainline too, yeah, looks
> like we call vprintk()->console_unlock() with IRQs-disabled.
>
> Hohumm..

Also, I used the preemptirqoff tracer, so even if it did re-enable
interrupts we should still have preemption disabled and still catch the
latency.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-06-10 14:45    [W:0.036 / U:0.784 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site