* Ingo Molnar <[email protected]> wrote:
> * Steven Rostedt <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 2012-06-28 at 19:16 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > > From: Steven Rostedt <[email protected]>
> > >
> > > The ring buffer reader page is used to swap a page from the writable
> > > ring buffer. If the writer happens to be on that page, it ends up on the
> > > reader page, but will simply move off of it, back into the writable ring
> > > buffer as writes are added.
> > >
> > > The time stamp passed back to the readers is stored in the cpu_buffer per
> > > CPU descriptor. This stamp is updated when a swap of the reader page takes
> > > place, and it reads the current stamp from the page taken from the
> > > writable
> > > ring buffer. Everytime a writer goes to a new page, it updates the time
> > > stamp
> > > of that page.
> > >
> > > The problem happens if a reader reads a page from an empty per CPU ring
> > > buffer.
> > > If the buffer is empty, the swap still takes place, placing the writer at
> > > the
> > > start of the reader page. If at a later time, a write happens, it updates
> > > the
> > > page's time stamp and continues. But the problem is that the read_stamp
> > > does
> > > not get updated, because the page was already swapped.
> > >
> > > The solution to this was to not swap the page if the ring buffer happens
> > > to
> > > be empty. This also removes the side effect that the writes on the reader
> > > page will not get updated because the writer never gets back on the reader
> > > page without a swap. That is, if a read happens on an empty buffer, but
> > > then
> > > no reads happen for a while. If a swap took place, and the writer were to
> > > start
> > > writing a lot of data (function tracer), it will start overflowing the
> > > ring buffer
> > > and overwrite the older data. But because the writer never goes back onto
> > > the
> > > reader page, the data left on the reader page never gets overwritten. This
> > > causes the reader to see really old data, followed by a jump to newer
> > > data.
> > >
> > > Link:
> > > http://lkml.kernel.org/r/[email protected]
> > > Google-Bug-Id: 6410455
> > > Reported-by: David Sharp <[email protected]>
> > > tested-by: David Sharp <[email protected]>
> > > Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt <[email protected]>
> >
> > I'm starting to consider that this patch should be in stable.
> >
> > Ingo, should I push this to urgent?
>
> Yeah, probably makes sense to do so, especially as it's rather
> small.
FYI, I have cherry picked it over into perf/urgent:
01c4359c155e ring-buffer: Fix uninitialized read_stamp
Thanks,
Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
