Re: [patch V4 part 1 07/36] locking/atomics: Flip fallbacks and instrumentation

2020-05-08 Thread Peter Zijlstra
On Thu, May 07, 2020 at 07:41:27PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Tue, 05 May 2020 15:16:09 +0200 > Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > Currently instrumentation of atomic primitives is done at the > > architecture level, while composites or fallbacks are provided at the > > generic level. > > > > T

Re: [patch V4 part 1 07/36] locking/atomics: Flip fallbacks and instrumentation

2020-05-07 Thread Steven Rostedt
On Tue, 05 May 2020 15:16:09 +0200 Thomas Gleixner wrote: > Currently instrumentation of atomic primitives is done at the > architecture level, while composites or fallbacks are provided at the > generic level. > > The result is that there are no uninstrumented variants of the > fallbacks. Since

Re: [patch V4 part 1 07/36] locking/atomics: Flip fallbacks and instrumentation

2020-05-05 Thread Mark Rutland
On Tue, May 05, 2020 at 03:16:09PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > Currently instrumentation of atomic primitives is done at the > architecture level, while composites or fallbacks are provided at the > generic level. > > The result is that there are no uninstrumented variants of the > fallbacks.

[patch V4 part 1 07/36] locking/atomics: Flip fallbacks and instrumentation

2020-05-05 Thread Thomas Gleixner
Currently instrumentation of atomic primitives is done at the architecture level, while composites or fallbacks are provided at the generic level. The result is that there are no uninstrumented variants of the fallbacks. Since there is now need of such (see the next patch), invert this ordering.