From: compudj@krystal.dyndns.org (Mathieu Desnoyers)
Subject: [ltt-dev] [patch] add tracepoints to trace activate/deactivate task
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2008 12:52:45 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20081210175245.GA13055@Krystal> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20081210171423.GA3137@redhat.com>
* Jason Baron (jbaron at redhat.com) wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 02:15:41PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Wed, 2008-12-10 at 07:27 -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> > >
> > > Do you think there would be other events that Jason would need to
> > > identify every time a task gets de/activated, or he is able to
> > > reconstruct this from the current tracepoints ?
> >
> > I don't know what events Jason wants, some of the things he mentioned
> > map directly to syscalls, so I'm not sure if we'd want to catch it at a
> > generic syscall layer, or a tracepoint per syscall guts.
> >
> >
>
> My goal is to instrument the scheduler at the most "interesting" points.
> Activate and Deactivate allow me to directly figure out queue length (posted in
> my previous mail), how long a process wait on a queue, and when a
> process moves between queues. Yes, I might be able to figure these out
> from insturmentation calls from schedule(), try_to_wake_up(),
> wake_up_new_task(), pull_task(), migrate_task(), etc. But its going to
> be awfully complex. Activate/deactivate task seem like very core basic
> scheduler primitives.
>
> Adding a tracepoint to set_task_cpu() is good but it doesn't tell me
> about whether or not a task is on queue. It simply tells me when a task
> is assigned a different cpu (which activate/deactivate can do as well).
>
> I understand and appreciate what you guys are saying about do not
> instrument the code too generally, but IMHO activate/deactivate are core
> scheduler primitives, which are difficult to piece together otherwise. I
> can up with more scripts that show their utility.
>
Would it be possible to simply use
p->se.on_rq
in the events already instrumenting the scheduler to keep track of the
activation state and manage to get the same result ?
And also, adding duplicate instrumentation to simplify tracer analysis
is imho the wrong approach.
Mathieu
>
> thanks,
>
> -Jason
>
>
>
--
Mathieu Desnoyers
OpenPGP key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-12-10 17:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-12-08 19:49 Jason Baron
2008-12-08 19:54 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-12-08 22:38 ` Jason Baron
2008-12-08 22:42 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-12-09 21:00 ` Jason Baron
2008-12-09 21:29 ` Jason Baron
2008-12-09 22:10 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-12-10 7:08 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-12-10 12:27 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-12-10 13:15 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-12-10 17:14 ` Jason Baron
2008-12-10 17:52 ` Mathieu Desnoyers [this message]
2008-12-10 19:28 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-12-10 12:34 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-12-10 13:14 ` Peter Zijlstra
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20081210175245.GA13055@Krystal \
--to=compudj@krystal.dyndns.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox