Re: [PATCH] ring-buffer: Never use absolute timestamp for start event

On Tue, 12 Dec 2023 09:31:31 +0900 Masami Hiramatsu (Google) wrote: > On Mon, 11 Dec 2023 11:59:49 -0500 > Steven Rostedt wrote: > > > From: "Steven Rostedt (Google)" > > > > On 32bit machines, the 64 bit timestamps are broken up into 32 bit words > > to keep from using local64_cmpxchg(), as

Re: [PATCH] ring-buffer: Never use absolute timestamp for start event

On Mon, 11 Dec 2023 11:59:49 -0500 Steven Rostedt wrote: > From: "Steven Rostedt (Google)" > > On 32bit machines, the 64 bit timestamps are broken up into 32 bit words > to keep from using local64_cmpxchg(), as that is very expensive on 32 bit > architectures. > > On 32 bit architectures, read

[PATCH] ring-buffer: Never use absolute timestamp for start event

From: "Steven Rostedt (Google)" On 32bit machines, the 64 bit timestamps are broken up into 32 bit words to keep from using local64_cmpxchg(), as that is very expensive on 32 bit architectures. On 32 bit architectures, reading these timestamps can happen in a middle of an update. In this case, t