Received: by 2002:a5b:505:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id o5csp897770ybp; Fri, 4 Oct 2019 06:43:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqz4tkySo7wwFtHhZP2V5t/PMn+Wx987NhrXFvmp0O6mAO6K6x97d1m0lS059O1dBcYIU9LP X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:7f03:: with SMTP id d3mr12375875ejr.115.1570196622856; Fri, 04 Oct 2019 06:43:42 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1570196622; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=OKQXWaTlAlK8pOQmb7eVxbgsiLpOzyYYCR8akdtV9dlLtozuf4qXtdt8Z07yzM1rNN wy0zo90I8fbOeVJxdlA7D/xW2bxaHep9RDRMw94Ysm8dJ23T7DKgKHp9nGbDGKVvbqN4 djKyZ1TtIcO0GtAF1cqN4uKJj4ZQD5JrGsjP/lrJKYHbonJy1Eq9eDtYQClcKIb9sC5i jZphiO1XPCBbq/uKhMG3OAJxsp21P0+qQmhZJ/gIlegWZx/UnVfV7s28TdkRn/6ZUjwE pmayTidlA3Ip5kYITcg5tKZwu+EizBVOdYGfj58TdGLfVDyCETqA7bXo+WdH4+x8fY2h jT9A== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version :references:in-reply-to:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date; bh=3DduHLTYyBbLQZMdJPdjmGxI0AE35lRLiMy0jvSTHns=; b=VEI1Gdbd6T/Iq3GMkKLJ089M8xMGq/Fjf7JtFIOZarOL1tg74WQno4IVYV8YiRo1J5 3P0oxSaMEJtQ7UPh+LZ1wPTByrzwy+6+VmotOz4aDFcdDOUSvXMyjYs/9inVdzwcm9wV U+vxWHHoZfFMB7a2HCJebaYMDVLOuhdbH0DD2EX16BlvLXP96W0gZzTrChy5hP+087P8 /d4ohMmbVdBUHncFo0jTf9uXNt0KoOhZj4J6scBcVbcxsyadLLU4K12OouwASyB7+RSo TAoo7KWFCtuTgDcrOZaBogN6jtSkbkb/PrXyvGHZ/mrcB19VwA3sJ+ZM+XwGQqM/1H1k +1rg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id u12si3083178ejt.21.2019.10.04.06.43.18; Fri, 04 Oct 2019 06:43:42 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2388561AbfJDNmb (ORCPT + 99 others); Fri, 4 Oct 2019 09:42:31 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:48308 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2388491AbfJDNmb (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Oct 2019 09:42:31 -0400 Received: from gandalf.local.home (cpe-66-24-58-225.stny.res.rr.com [66.24.58.225]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2990620700; Fri, 4 Oct 2019 13:42:30 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2019 09:42:28 -0400 From: Steven Rostedt To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Daniel Bristot de Oliveira , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, Nadav Amit , Andy Lutomirski , Dave Hansen , Song Liu , Masami Hiramatsu Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] x86/ftrace: Use text_poke() Message-ID: <20191004094228.5a5774fe@gandalf.local.home> In-Reply-To: <20191004112237.GA19463@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <20190827180622.159326993@infradead.org> <20190827181147.166658077@infradead.org> <20191002182106.GC4643@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20191003181045.7fb1a5b3@gandalf.local.home> <20191004112237.GA19463@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.17.3 (GTK+ 2.24.32; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 4 Oct 2019 13:22:37 +0200 Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Thu, Oct 03, 2019 at 06:10:45PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > But still, we are going from 120 to 660 IPIs for every CPU. Not saying > > it's a problem, but something that we should note. Someone (those that > > don't like kernel interference) may complain. > > It is machine wide function tracing, interference is going to happen.. > :-) > > Anyway, we can grow the batch size if sufficient benefit can be shown to > exist. Yeah, I was thinking that we just go with these patches and then fix the IPI issue when someone starts complaining ;-) Anyway, is this series ready to go? I can pull them in (I guess I should get an ack from Thomas or Ingo as they are x86 specific). I'm currently working on code that affects the same code paths as this patch, and would like to build my changes on top of this, instead of monkeying around with major conflicts. -- Steve