Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 26 Jul 2007 12:17:00 -0300 | From | Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <> | Subject | Re: [Question] Hooks for scheduler tracing (CFS) |
| |
Frank Ch. Eigler wrote: > Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca> 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@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |