Re: [PATCH v2] ring-buffer: Limit time with disabled interrupts in rb_check_pages()

On Thu, 4 Jul 2024 13:03:47 +0200 Petr Pavlu wrote: > > I'm dumb. What's an "era"? > > I meant it as a calendar era or epoch. The idea was to hint this is > a number that identifies some structural state of the pages list. Maybe > pages_gen ("generation") or another name would be better? Ah,

Re: [PATCH v2] ring-buffer: Limit time with disabled interrupts in rb_check_pages()

On 7/3/24 23:44, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Wed, 3 Jul 2024 09:53:14 +0200 > Petr Pavlu wrote: > >> The function rb_check_pages() validates the integrity of a specified >> per-CPU tracing ring buffer. It does so by traversing the underlying >> linked list and checking its next and prev links. >>

Re: [PATCH v2] ring-buffer: Limit time with disabled interrupts in rb_check_pages()

On Wed, 3 Jul 2024 09:53:14 +0200 Petr Pavlu wrote: > The function rb_check_pages() validates the integrity of a specified > per-CPU tracing ring buffer. It does so by traversing the underlying > linked list and checking its next and prev links. > > To guarantee that the list isn't modified dur

[PATCH v2] ring-buffer: Limit time with disabled interrupts in rb_check_pages()

The function rb_check_pages() validates the integrity of a specified per-CPU tracing ring buffer. It does so by traversing the underlying linked list and checking its next and prev links. To guarantee that the list isn't modified during the check, a caller typically needs to take cpu_buffer->reade