From: Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@cn.fujitsu.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Zhaolei <zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com>,
mingo@elte.hu, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
fweisbec@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] ftrace: add tracepoint for timer
Date: Wed, 03 Jun 2009 10:52:37 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4A25E575.5000601@cn.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.00.0905290935030.3397@localhost.localdomain>
Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Fri, 29 May 2009, Zhaolei wrote:
>> But, for trace_timer_start() in __mod_timer(), we need to put it after
>> timer->* changed.
>
> Why ?
>
>>> + TP_fast_assign(
>>> + __entry->timer = timer;
>>> + __entry->function = timer->function;
>>> + __entry->expires = timer->expires;
>>> + __entry->cpu = cpu;
>
> Again, neither timer nor function nor expires will change when the
> timer is added, right ?
>
> The only unknown at this point is cpu. See below.
>
>> Nevertheless, it don't means we need separate trace_timer_start() and
>> debug_timer_activate(), because we can put move debug_timer_activate() below,
>> as:
>> - debug_timer_activate(timer);
>> ...
>> timer->expires = expires;
>> internal_add_timer(base, timer);
>> + debug_timer_activate(timer);
>
> No, you can not call it with the base->lock held.
>
>> + trace_timer_start(timer, smp_processor_id());
>
> Also using smp_processor_id() here is wrong. We do not necessarily add
> the timer to the current CPUs timer wheel. See the code which selects
> the timer base. So this information is rather useless, because the
> tracer knows anyway on which CPU we are running.
>
> Unfortunately we do not have an easy way to figure out to which CPU
> the base belongs (except if it's the base of the current CPU). There
> is not much we can do about that. But OTOH, this is not a problem
> because we see when the timer expires on which CPU it was enqueued. So
> scrapping the cpu entry in the trace completely is not a big loss.
>
> The same applies to hrtimers as well.
>
Hi tglx:
I also have different view here. :-)
As you say, "We do not necessarily add the timer to the current CPUs timer
wheel", but the timer is added to current CPU in __mod_timer(), selects the
timer base as below code:
new_base = __get_cpu_var(tvec_bases);
In this case, we can use smp_processor_id() to get the CPU which timer is
added.
We can not add the timer to the current CPUs by using add_timer_on(), selects
the timer base in this function as below code:
struct tvec_base *base = per_cpu(tvec_bases, cpu);
In this case, We can know the timer is added to 'cpu'.
So, I add trace_timer_start() in __mod_timer() and add_timer_on()in my patch.
In hrtimer, all timer is added to the current CPU which can be getted by using
smp_processor_id() in probe function, so it not has 'cpu' argument in my patch.
In addition, we do better not put trace_timer_start() and debug_timer_activate
in one function, have two reasons:
1: for trace_timer_start()'s logic, the timer start event is completed in
internal_add_timer(), in other words: the timer is not start before
internal_add_timer().
2: as Zhaolei says in the last mail, the timer's data may changed after
debug_timer_activate().
Thanks,
Xiao Guangrong
>
> tglx
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-06-03 2:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-05-22 9:53 [PATCH 1/3] ftrace: add tracepoint for timer Xiao Guangrong
2009-05-26 21:40 ` Thomas Gleixner
2009-05-27 7:36 ` Xiao Guangrong
2009-05-27 10:10 ` Thomas Gleixner
2009-05-29 2:00 ` Zhaolei
2009-05-29 9:55 ` Thomas Gleixner
2009-06-01 9:08 ` Zhaolei
2009-06-03 2:52 ` Xiao Guangrong [this message]
2009-06-03 16:39 ` Thomas Gleixner
2009-06-04 5:38 ` Xiao Guangrong
2009-06-04 8:44 ` Thomas Gleixner
2009-06-10 9:42 ` Xiao Guangrong
2009-06-10 10:58 ` Thomas Gleixner
2009-06-03 2:50 ` Xiao Guangrong
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=4A25E575.5000601@cn.fujitsu.com \
--to=xiaoguangrong@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com \
/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.