Re: [PATCH v4] sched/debug: Use sched_debug_lock to serialize use of cgroup_path[] only

2021-04-06 Thread Waiman Long
On 4/6/21 5:15 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: On Mon, Apr 05, 2021 at 07:42:03PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote: The handling of sysrq key can be activated by echoing the key to /proc/sysrq-trigger or via the magic key sequence typed into a terminal that is connected to the system in some way (serial, USB

Re: [PATCH v4] sched/debug: Use sched_debug_lock to serialize use of cgroup_path[] only

2021-04-06 Thread Peter Zijlstra
On Mon, Apr 05, 2021 at 07:42:03PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote: > The handling of sysrq key can be activated by echoing the key to > /proc/sysrq-trigger or via the magic key sequence typed into a terminal > that is connected to the system in some way (serial, USB or other mean). > In the former case,

Re: [PATCH v4] sched/debug: Use sched_debug_lock to serialize use of cgroup_path[] only

2021-04-05 Thread Waiman Long
On 4/5/21 8:18 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote: On Mon, 5 Apr 2021 19:42:03 -0400 Waiman Long wrote: +/* + * All the print_cpu() callers from sched_debug_show() will be allowed + * to contend for sched_debug_lock and use group_path[] as their SEQ_printf() + * calls will be much faster. However only

Re: [PATCH v4] sched/debug: Use sched_debug_lock to serialize use of cgroup_path[] only

2021-04-05 Thread Steven Rostedt
On Mon, 5 Apr 2021 19:42:03 -0400 Waiman Long wrote: > +/* > + * All the print_cpu() callers from sched_debug_show() will be allowed > + * to contend for sched_debug_lock and use group_path[] as their SEQ_printf() > + * calls will be much faster. However only one print_cpu() caller from > + *

[PATCH v4] sched/debug: Use sched_debug_lock to serialize use of cgroup_path[] only

2021-04-05 Thread Waiman Long
The handling of sysrq key can be activated by echoing the key to /proc/sysrq-trigger or via the magic key sequence typed into a terminal that is connected to the system in some way (serial, USB or other mean). In the former case, the handling is done in a user context. In the latter case, it is