From: Theodore Tso <tytso@mit.edu>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Mike Snitzer <snitzer@gmail.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH][RFC] trace: profile likely and unlikely annotations
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2008 10:37:20 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20081028143720.GD8869@mit.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.1.10.0810272316270.802@gandalf.stny.rr.com>
On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 12:12:48AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>
> Andrew Morton recently suggested having an in-kernel way to profile
> likely and unlikely macros. This patch achieves that goal.
Maybe I'm confused, but when I read through the patch, it looks like
that 'hit' is incremented whenever the condition is true, and 'missed'
is incremented whenever the condition is false, correct?
Is that what you intended? So for profile_unlikely, "missed" is good,
and "hit" is bad, and for profile_likely, "hit" is good, and "missed"
is bad. That seems horribly confusing.
If that wasn't what you intended, the meaning of "hit" and "missed"
seems to be highly confusing, either way. Can we perhaps use some
other terminology? Simply using "True" and "False" would be better,
since there's no possible confusion what the labels mean.
> +#define unlikely(x) ({ \
> + int ______r; \
> + static struct ftrace_likely_data ______f \
> + __attribute__((__aligned__(4))) \
> + __attribute__((section("_ftrace_unlikely"))); \
> + if (unlikely_notrace(!______f.ip)) \
> + ______f.ip = __THIS_IP__; \
> + ______r = unlikely_notrace(x); \
> + ftrace_likely_update(&______f, ______r); \
> + ______r; \
> + })
Note that unlikely(x) calls ftrace_likely_update(), which does this:
> +void ftrace_likely_update(struct ftrace_likely_data *f, int val)
> +{
> + /* FIXME: Make this atomic! */
> + if (val)
> + f->hit++;
> + else
> + f->missed++;
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(ftrace_likely_update);
So that seems to mean that if unlikely(x) is false, then _____r is 0,
which means we increment f->missed. Or am I missing something?
I would have thought that if unlikely(x) is false, that's *good*,
since it means the unlikely label was correct. And normally, when
people think about cache hits vs cache misses, hits are good and
misses are bad. Which is why I think the terminology is highly
confusing...
- Ted
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-10-28 14:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-10-27 22:29 why unlikely(rsv) in ext3_clear_inode()? Mike Snitzer
2008-10-27 22:53 ` Steven Rostedt
2008-10-27 23:32 ` Steven Rostedt
2008-10-27 23:48 ` Andrew Morton
2008-10-28 0:13 ` Theodore Tso
2008-10-28 0:21 ` Steven Rostedt
2008-10-28 4:12 ` [PATCH][RFC] trace: profile likely and unlikely annotations Steven Rostedt
2008-10-28 4:23 ` Arjan van de Ven
2008-10-28 4:39 ` Andrew Morton
2008-10-28 14:37 ` Theodore Tso [this message]
2008-10-28 14:48 ` Arjan van de Ven
2008-10-28 14:51 ` Steven Rostedt
2008-10-29 16:35 ` [PATCH 1/2 v2][RFC] " Steven Rostedt
2008-10-29 16:38 ` [PATCH 2/2 v2][RFC] ftrace: unlikely annotation tracer Steven Rostedt
2008-10-29 16:40 ` [PATCH 1/2 v2][RFC] trace: profile likely and unlikely annotations Arjan van de Ven
2008-10-29 22:39 ` [PATCH 1/2 v3][RFC] " Steven Rostedt
2008-10-29 22:40 ` [PATCH 2/2 v3][RFC] ftrace: unlikely annotation tracer Steven Rostedt
2008-10-30 14:32 ` [PATCH 1/2 v3][RFC] trace: profile likely and unlikely annotations Jörn Engel
2008-10-30 14:55 ` Theodore Tso
2008-10-30 15:10 ` Steven Rostedt
2008-10-28 14:49 ` [PATCH][RFC] " Steven Rostedt
2008-10-28 18:29 ` Theodore Tso
2008-10-28 18:41 ` Steven Rostedt
2008-10-28 0:14 ` why unlikely(rsv) in ext3_clear_inode()? Mike Snitzer
2008-10-27 23:52 ` Mingming Cao
2008-10-28 0:09 ` Mike Snitzer
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=20081028143720.GD8869@mit.edu \
--to=tytso@mit.edu \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=arjan@infradead.org \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=snitzer@gmail.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.