From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers-vg+e7yoeK/dWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>
To: Waiman Long <longman-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz-wEGCiKHe2LqWVfeAwA7xHQ@public.gmane.org>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>,
Will Deacon <will-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>,
linux-kernel
<linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx-hfZtesqFncYOwBW4kG4KsQ@public.gmane.org>,
rostedt <rostedt-nx8X9YLhiw1AfugRpC6u6w@public.gmane.org>,
Byungchul Park <byungchul.park-Hm3cg6mZ9cc@public.gmane.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney"
<paul.mckenney-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>,
Radoslaw Burny <rburny-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>,
Tejun Heo <tj-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>,
rcu <rcu-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>,
cgroups <cgroups-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>,
linux-btrfs <linux-btrfs-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>,
intel-gfx
<intel-gfx-PD4FTy7X32lNgt0PjOBp9y5qC8QIuHrW@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 00/12] locking: Separate lock tracepoints from lockdep/lock_stat (v1)
Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2022 14:17:09 -0500 (EST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <593915946.50384.1644434229077.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <69e5f778-8715-4acf-c027-58b6ec4a9e77-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
----- On Feb 9, 2022, at 2:02 PM, Waiman Long longman-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org wrote:
> On 2/9/22 13:29, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
>> ----- On Feb 9, 2022, at 1:19 PM, Waiman Long longman-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org wrote:
>>
>>> On 2/9/22 04:09, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Feb 08, 2022 at 10:41:56AM -0800, Namhyung Kim wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Eventually I'm mostly interested in the contended locks only and I
>>>>> want to reduce the overhead in the fast path. By moving that, it'd be
>>>>> easy to track contended locks with timing by using two tracepoints.
>>>> So why not put in two new tracepoints and call it a day?
>>>>
>>>> Why muck about with all that lockdep stuff just to preserve the name
>>>> (and in the process continue to blow up data structures etc..). This
>>>> leaves distros in a bind, will they enable this config and provide
>>>> tracepoints while bloating the data structures and destroying things
>>>> like lockref (which relies on sizeof(spinlock_t)), or not provide this
>>>> at all.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, the name is convenient, but it's just not worth it IMO. It makes
>>>> the whole proposition too much of a trade-off.
>>>>
>>>> Would it not be possible to reconstruct enough useful information from
>>>> the lock callsite?
>>>>
>>> I second that as I don't want to see the size of a spinlock exceeds 4
>>> bytes in a production system.
>>>
>>> Instead of storing additional information (e.g. lock name) directly into
>>> the lock itself. Maybe we can store it elsewhere and use the lock
>>> address as the key to locate it in a hash table. We can certainly extend
>>> the various lock init functions to do that. It will be trickier for
>>> statically initialized locks, but we can probably find a way to do that too.
>> If we go down that route, it would be nice if we can support a few different
>> use-cases for various tracers out there.
>>
>> One use-case (a) requires the ability to query the lock name based on its
>> address as key.
>> For this a hash table is a good fit. This would allow tracers like ftrace to
>> output lock names in its human-readable output which is formatted within the
>> kernel.
>>
>> Another use-case (b) is to be able to "dump" the lock { name, address } tuples
>> into the trace stream (we call this statedump events in lttng), and do the
>> translation from address to name at post-processing. This simply requires
>> that this information is available for iteration for both the core kernel
>> and module locks, so the tracer can dump this information on trace start
>> and module load.
>>
>> Use-case (b) is very similar to what is done for the kernel tracepoints. Based
>> on this, implementing the init code that iterates on those sections and
>> populates
>> a hash table for use-case (a) should be easy enough.
>
> Yes, that are good use cases for this type of functionality. I do need
> to think about how to do it for statically initialized lock first.
Tracepoints already solved that problem.
Look at the macro DEFINE_TRACE_FN() in include/linux/tracepoint.h. You will notice that
it statically defines a struct tracepoint in a separate section and a tracepoint_ptr_t
in a __tracepoints_ptrs section.
Then the other parts of the picture are in kernel/tracepoint.c:
extern tracepoint_ptr_t __start___tracepoints_ptrs[];
extern tracepoint_ptr_t __stop___tracepoints_ptrs[];
and kernel/module.c:find_module_sections()
#ifdef CONFIG_TRACEPOINTS
mod->tracepoints_ptrs = section_objs(info, "__tracepoints_ptrs",
sizeof(*mod->tracepoints_ptrs),
&mod->num_tracepoints);
#endif
and the iteration code over kernel and modules in kernel/tracepoint.c.
All you need in addition is in include/asm-generic/vmlinux.lds.h, we add
to the DATA_DATA define an entry such as:
STRUCT_ALIGN(); \
*(__tracepoints) \
and in RO_DATA:
. = ALIGN(8); \
__start___tracepoints_ptrs = .; \
KEEP(*(__tracepoints_ptrs)) /* Tracepoints: pointer array */ \
__stop___tracepoints_ptrs = .;
AFAIU, if you do something similar for a structure that contains your relevant
lock information, it should be straightforward to handle statically initialized
locks.
Thanks,
Mathieu
>
> Thanks,
> Longman
--
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-02-09 19:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-02-08 18:41 [RFC 00/12] locking: Separate lock tracepoints from lockdep/lock_stat (v1) Namhyung Kim
[not found] ` <20220208184208.79303-1-namhyung-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>
2022-02-08 18:41 ` [PATCH 02/12] cgroup: rstat: Make cgroup_rstat_cpu_lock name readable Namhyung Kim
2022-02-08 18:46 ` Tejun Heo
[not found] ` <YgK6k4TXnRbm02dh-NiLfg/pYEd1N0TnZuCh8vA@public.gmane.org>
2022-02-08 19:16 ` Namhyung Kim
[not found] ` <CAM9d7cgKLycpFuXq0VgC=ADtAipXtKdfRcDqvZwMrNBz7hXd7A-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
2022-02-08 23:51 ` Namhyung Kim
2022-02-08 19:14 ` [RFC 00/12] locking: Separate lock tracepoints from lockdep/lock_stat (v1) Namhyung Kim
2022-02-09 9:09 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-02-09 18:19 ` Waiman Long
[not found] ` <24fe6a08-5931-8e8d-8d77-459388c4654e-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2022-02-09 18:29 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2022-02-09 19:02 ` Waiman Long
[not found] ` <69e5f778-8715-4acf-c027-58b6ec4a9e77-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2022-02-09 19:17 ` Mathieu Desnoyers [this message]
2022-02-09 19:37 ` Waiman Long
2022-02-09 19:22 ` Namhyung Kim
[not found] ` <CAM9d7ci=N2NVj57k=W0ebqBzfW+ThBqYSrx-CZbgwGcbOSrEGA-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
2022-02-09 19:28 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2022-02-09 19:45 ` Namhyung Kim
[not found] ` <CAM9d7cj=tj6pA48q_wkQOGn-2vUc9FRj63bMBOm5R7OukmMbTQ-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
2022-02-09 19:56 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2022-02-09 20:17 ` Waiman Long
2022-02-10 0:27 ` Namhyung Kim
2022-02-10 2:12 ` Waiman Long
2022-02-10 9:33 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-02-10 0:32 ` Namhyung Kim
[not found] ` <CAM9d7cgq+jxu6FJuKhZkprn7dO4DiG5pDjmYZzneQYTfKOM85g-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
2022-02-10 9:13 ` Peter Zijlstra
[not found] ` <YgTXUQ9CBoo3+A+c-Nxj+rRp3nVydTX5a5knrm8zTDFooKrT+cvkQGrU6aU0@public.gmane.org>
2022-02-10 19:14 ` Paul E. McKenney
2022-02-10 19:27 ` Waiman Long
[not found] ` <52de2e14-33d9-bdda-4b37-3e72ae9954c7-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2022-02-10 20:10 ` Paul E. McKenney
2022-02-11 5:57 ` Namhyung Kim
2022-02-11 5:55 ` Namhyung Kim
2022-02-11 10:39 ` Peter Zijlstra
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=593915946.50384.1644434229077.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com \
--to=mathieu.desnoyers-vg+e7yoek/dwk0htik3j/w@public.gmane.org \
--cc=boqun.feng-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org \
--cc=byungchul.park-Hm3cg6mZ9cc@public.gmane.org \
--cc=cgroups-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=intel-gfx-PD4FTy7X32lNgt0PjOBp9y5qC8QIuHrW@public.gmane.org \
--cc=linux-btrfs-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=longman-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=mingo-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org \
--cc=namhyung-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org \
--cc=paul.mckenney-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org \
--cc=peterz-wEGCiKHe2LqWVfeAwA7xHQ@public.gmane.org \
--cc=rburny-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=rcu-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=rostedt-nx8X9YLhiw1AfugRpC6u6w@public.gmane.org \
--cc=tglx-hfZtesqFncYOwBW4kG4KsQ@public.gmane.org \
--cc=tj-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org \
--cc=will-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org \
/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