From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753037Ab2FPFWb (ORCPT ); Sat, 16 Jun 2012 01:22:31 -0400 Received: from relay4-d.mail.gandi.net ([217.70.183.196]:34480 "EHLO relay4-d.mail.gandi.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752253Ab2FPFWa (ORCPT ); Sat, 16 Jun 2012 01:22:30 -0400 X-Originating-IP: 217.70.178.143 X-Originating-IP: 50.43.46.74 Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2012 22:22:14 -0700 From: Josh Triplett To: "Paul E. McKenney" Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@elte.hu, laijs@cn.fujitsu.com, dipankar@in.ibm.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca, niv@us.ibm.com, tglx@linutronix.de, peterz@infradead.org, rostedt@goodmis.org, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu, dhowells@redhat.com, eric.dumazet@gmail.com, darren@dvhart.com, fweisbec@gmail.com, patches@linaro.org Subject: Re: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 14/15] rcu: Use for_each_rcu_flavor() in TREE_RCU tracing Message-ID: <20120616052214.GB8252@leaf> References: <20120615210550.GA27506@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1339794370-28119-1-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1339794370-28119-14-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20120615235957.GF7613@leaf> <20120616005605.GV2389@linux.vnet.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120616005605.GV2389@linux.vnet.ibm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 05:56:05PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 04:59:57PM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 02:06:09PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > @@ -129,24 +125,16 @@ static void print_one_rcu_data(struct seq_file *m, struct rcu_data *rdp) > > > rdp->n_cbs_invoked, rdp->n_cbs_orphaned, rdp->n_cbs_adopted); > > > } > > > > > > -#define PRINT_RCU_DATA(name, func, m) \ > > > - do { \ > > > - int _p_r_d_i; \ > > > - \ > > > - for_each_possible_cpu(_p_r_d_i) \ > > > - func(m, &per_cpu(name, _p_r_d_i)); \ > > > - } while (0) > > > - > > > static int show_rcudata(struct seq_file *m, void *unused) > > > { > > > -#ifdef CONFIG_TREE_PREEMPT_RCU > > > - seq_puts(m, "rcu_preempt:\n"); > > > - PRINT_RCU_DATA(rcu_preempt_data, print_one_rcu_data, m); > > > -#endif /* #ifdef CONFIG_TREE_PREEMPT_RCU */ > > > - seq_puts(m, "rcu_sched:\n"); > > > - PRINT_RCU_DATA(rcu_sched_data, print_one_rcu_data, m); > > > - seq_puts(m, "rcu_bh:\n"); > > > - PRINT_RCU_DATA(rcu_bh_data, print_one_rcu_data, m); > > > + int cpu; > > > + struct rcu_state *rsp; > > > + > > > + for_each_rcu_flavor(rsp) { > > > + seq_printf(m, "%s:\n", rsp->name); > > > + for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) > > > + print_one_rcu_data(m, per_cpu_ptr(rsp->rda, cpu)); > > > + } > > > > As above, I'd suggest inlining print_one_rcu_data. > > Not this one, too bulky. I looked at the implementation; it just consists of a pile of calls to seq_printf. What about that makes it too bulky to include in the body of the loop? > > > @@ -200,6 +188,9 @@ static void print_one_rcu_data_csv(struct seq_file *m, struct rcu_data *rdp) > > > > > > static int show_rcudata_csv(struct seq_file *m, void *unused) > > > { > > > + int cpu; > > > + struct rcu_state *rsp; > > > + > > > seq_puts(m, "\"CPU\",\"Online?\",\"c\",\"g\",\"pq\",\"pgp\",\"pq\","); > > > seq_puts(m, "\"dt\",\"dt nesting\",\"dt NMI nesting\",\"df\","); > > > seq_puts(m, "\"of\",\"qll\",\"ql\",\"qs\""); > > > @@ -207,14 +198,11 @@ static int show_rcudata_csv(struct seq_file *m, void *unused) > > > seq_puts(m, "\"kt\",\"ktl\""); > > > #endif /* #ifdef CONFIG_RCU_BOOST */ > > > seq_puts(m, ",\"b\",\"ci\",\"co\",\"ca\"\n"); > > > -#ifdef CONFIG_TREE_PREEMPT_RCU > > > - seq_puts(m, "\"rcu_preempt:\"\n"); > > > - PRINT_RCU_DATA(rcu_preempt_data, print_one_rcu_data_csv, m); > > > -#endif /* #ifdef CONFIG_TREE_PREEMPT_RCU */ > > > - seq_puts(m, "\"rcu_sched:\"\n"); > > > - PRINT_RCU_DATA(rcu_sched_data, print_one_rcu_data_csv, m); > > > - seq_puts(m, "\"rcu_bh:\"\n"); > > > - PRINT_RCU_DATA(rcu_bh_data, print_one_rcu_data_csv, m); > > > + for_each_rcu_flavor(rsp) { > > > + seq_printf(m, "\"%s:\"\n", rsp->name); > > > + for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) > > > + print_one_rcu_data_csv(m, per_cpu_ptr(rsp->rda, cpu)); > > > + } > > > > As above, I'd suggest inlining print_one_rcu_data_csv. > > Also too bulky. Also just a few calls to seq_printf. :) > > > @@ -304,9 +292,9 @@ static void print_one_rcu_state(struct seq_file *m, struct rcu_state *rsp) > > > struct rcu_node *rnp; > > > > > > gpnum = rsp->gpnum; > > > - seq_printf(m, "c=%lu g=%lu s=%d jfq=%ld j=%x " > > > + seq_printf(m, "%s: c=%lu g=%lu s=%d jfq=%ld j=%x " > > > "nfqs=%lu/nfqsng=%lu(%lu) fqlh=%lu oqlen=%ld/%ld\n", > > > - rsp->completed, gpnum, rsp->fqs_state, > > > + rsp->name, rsp->completed, gpnum, rsp->fqs_state, > > > (long)(rsp->jiffies_force_qs - jiffies), > > > (int)(jiffies & 0xffff), > > > rsp->n_force_qs, rsp->n_force_qs_ngp, > > > @@ -329,14 +317,10 @@ static void print_one_rcu_state(struct seq_file *m, struct rcu_state *rsp) > > > > > > static int show_rcuhier(struct seq_file *m, void *unused) > > > { > > > -#ifdef CONFIG_TREE_PREEMPT_RCU > > > - seq_puts(m, "rcu_preempt:\n"); > > > - print_one_rcu_state(m, &rcu_preempt_state); > > > -#endif /* #ifdef CONFIG_TREE_PREEMPT_RCU */ > > > - seq_puts(m, "rcu_sched:\n"); > > > - print_one_rcu_state(m, &rcu_sched_state); > > > - seq_puts(m, "rcu_bh:\n"); > > > - print_one_rcu_state(m, &rcu_bh_state); > > > + struct rcu_state *rsp; > > > + > > > + for_each_rcu_flavor(rsp) > > > + print_one_rcu_state(m, rsp); > > > > As above, I'd suggest inlining print_one_rcu_state. > > Also too bulky. This one I'll grant, since it would introduce an additional level of nested loop. > > > @@ -377,11 +361,10 @@ static void show_one_rcugp(struct seq_file *m, struct rcu_state *rsp) > > > > > > static int show_rcugp(struct seq_file *m, void *unused) > > > { > > > -#ifdef CONFIG_TREE_PREEMPT_RCU > > > - show_one_rcugp(m, &rcu_preempt_state); > > > -#endif /* #ifdef CONFIG_TREE_PREEMPT_RCU */ > > > - show_one_rcugp(m, &rcu_sched_state); > > > - show_one_rcugp(m, &rcu_bh_state); > > > + struct rcu_state *rsp; > > > + > > > + for_each_rcu_flavor(rsp) > > > + show_one_rcugp(m, rsp); > > > > As above, I'd suggest inlining show_one_rcugp. > > Also too bulky. show_one_rcugp seems like an extremely simple function; what makes it unsuitable for the body of this loop? - Josh Triplett