From: mingo@elte.hu (Ingo Molnar)
Subject: [ltt-dev] [patch 7/9] LTTng instrumentation - kernel
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2009 09:40:54 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090325084054.GB11217@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200903251143.12472.rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
* Rusty Russell <rusty at rustcorp.com.au> wrote:
> On Wednesday 25 March 2009 05:03:13 Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > (Rusty Cc:-ed - for the module.c tracepoints below)
>
> Thanks, tho they look fine and non-intrusive to me.
Thanks - i'll take this as an Acked-by :-)
( Mathieu, mind re-sending a variant that does them via
TRACE_EVENT(), against the tracing tree? That makes it useful not
just to LTTng but the default mainline kernel as well. Thanks! )
> > I believe that to have a complete picture of module usage, module
> > refcount get/put events should be included as well, beyond the basic
> > load/free events.
> >
> > These both have performance impact (a module get/put in a fastpath
> > hurts scalability), and are informative in terms of establishing the
> > module dependency graph.
>
> A module_get()/put() should not hurt scalability at all! I went
> to great and horrible lengths to ensure that was the case since
> the rewrite in 2.4.
i know, it uses percpu refcounts :) Still it can be somewhat
non-trivial in a fastpath:
static inline int try_module_get(struct module *module)
{
int ret = 1;
if (module) {
unsigned int cpu = get_cpu();
if (likely(module_is_live(module)))
local_inc(__module_ref_addr(module, cpu));
else
ret = 0;
put_cpu();
}
return ret;
}
So we want to reduce excessive uses of it.
[ And please forget i mentioned scalability - that bit is fine and
you were offended rightfully :) ]
This reminds me. Couldnt we now:
#ifdef CONFIG_SMP
char *refptr;
#else
local_t ref;
#endif
... unify these bits to just standardize on a per-cpu refptr all the
time, with Tejun's ueber-cool percpu changes in place?
> But a module dependency graph et. al. would be kind of cool.
Yeah. Can be in a separate patch as well - load/unload events are
meaningful in isolation as well.
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-03-25 8:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 62+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-03-24 15:56 [ltt-dev] [patch 0/9] LTTng core kernel instrumentation Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-03-24 15:56 ` [ltt-dev] [patch 1/9] IRQ handle prepare for instrumentation Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-03-24 15:56 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-03-24 15:56 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-03-24 15:56 ` [ltt-dev] [patch 2/9] LTTng instrumentation - irq Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-03-24 15:56 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-03-24 15:56 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-03-24 17:33 ` Jason Baron
2009-03-24 17:50 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-03-24 17:57 ` Jason Baron
2009-03-24 19:12 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-03-24 20:11 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-03-24 20:51 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-03-25 8:47 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-03-25 18:30 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-03-25 2:00 ` Steven Rostedt
2009-03-26 18:27 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-03-27 22:53 ` Steven Rostedt
2009-04-02 2:42 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-03-25 2:09 ` Steven Rostedt
2009-03-26 18:28 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-03-27 19:18 ` Jason Baron
2009-03-24 19:14 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-03-27 22:12 ` Thomas Gleixner
2009-03-24 15:56 ` [ltt-dev] [patch 3/9] LTTng instrumentation tasklets Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-03-24 15:56 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-03-24 15:56 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-03-24 17:56 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-03-25 13:52 ` Chetan.Loke
2009-03-25 14:17 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-03-25 17:37 ` Chetan.Loke
2009-03-25 17:52 ` Steven Rostedt
2009-03-24 15:56 ` [ltt-dev] [patch 4/9] LTTng instrumentation softirq Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-03-24 15:56 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-03-24 15:56 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-03-24 18:01 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-03-24 15:56 ` [ltt-dev] [patch 5/9] LTTng instrumentation scheduler fix task migration Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-03-24 15:56 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-03-24 15:56 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-03-24 17:53 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-03-24 15:56 ` [ltt-dev] [patch 6/9] LTTng instrumentation - timer Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-03-24 15:56 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-03-24 15:56 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-03-24 18:21 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-03-24 19:14 ` Thomas Gleixner
2009-03-24 20:47 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-03-27 22:05 ` Thomas Gleixner
2009-03-24 15:56 ` [ltt-dev] [patch 7/9] LTTng instrumentation - kernel Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-03-24 15:56 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-03-24 15:56 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-03-24 18:33 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-03-25 1:13 ` Rusty Russell
2009-03-25 8:40 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2009-03-25 13:06 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2009-03-24 15:56 ` [ltt-dev] [patch 8/9] LTTng instrumentation - filemap Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-03-24 15:56 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-03-24 15:56 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-03-24 18:39 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-03-24 15:56 ` [ltt-dev] [patch 9/9] LTTng instrumentation - swap Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-03-24 15:56 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-03-24 15:56 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-03-24 18:51 ` Ingo Molnar
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=20090325084054.GB11217@elte.hu \
--to=mingo@elte.hu \
/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