lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Jul]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH -printk] printk, tracing: fix console tracepoint
On Tue, Jul 12, 2022 at 09:39:40AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Jul 2022 04:49:54 -0700
> "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> > > But a quick fix that stopped the bleeding and allowed printk() to
> > > progress would be useful in the short term, regardless of whether or
> > > not in the longer term it makes sense to make srcu_read_lock_trace()
> > > and srcu_read_unlock_trace() NMI-safe.
> >
> > Except that doesn't rcuidle && in_nmi() imply a misplaced trace event?
> >
> > Isn't it still the case that you are not supposed to have trace events
> > in NMI handlers before RCU is watching or after it is no longer watching,
> > just as for entry/exit code in general? Once in the body of the handler,
> > rcuidle should be false and all should be well.
> >
> > Or am I missing something here?
>
> I guess the question is, can we have printk() in such a place? Because this
> tracepoint is attached to printk and where ever printk is done so is this
> tracepoint.

As I understand it, code in such a place should be labeled noinstr.
Then the call to printk() would be complained about as an illegal
noinstr-to-non-noinstr call.

But where exactly is that printk()?

Thanx, Paul

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-07-12 15:50    [W:0.075 / U:1.412 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site