From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755805Ab2FPGmx (ORCPT ); Sat, 16 Jun 2012 02:42:53 -0400 Received: from e32.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.150]:36989 "EHLO e32.co.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752576Ab2FPGmw (ORCPT ); Sat, 16 Jun 2012 02:42:52 -0400 Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2012 23:42:42 -0700 From: "Paul E. McKenney" To: Josh Triplett 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: <20120616064242.GC2420@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Reply-To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com 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> <20120616052214.GB8252@leaf> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120616052214.GB8252@leaf> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER x-cbid: 12061606-3270-0000-0000-000007395EB4 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 10:22:14PM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote: > 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? Your referring to it as "a pile of calls" is strong evidence. ;-) > > > > @@ -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. :) For some definition or another of a few lines of code. ;-) > > > > @@ -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? Ummm... Nothing. I actually did inline this one. I was clearly confused when documenting my actions! Thanx, Paul