From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1754791Ab2GXQAZ (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Tue, 24 Jul 2012 12:00:25 -0400
Received: from g4t0014.houston.hp.com ([15.201.24.17]:12819 "EHLO
	g4t0014.houston.hp.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1753771Ab2GXQAX (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 24 Jul 2012 12:00:23 -0400
Message-ID: <1343145334.3010.334.camel@misato.fc.hp.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] ACPI: Add acpi_pr_<level>() interfaces
From: Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@hp.com>
To: shuah.khan@hp.com
Cc: lenb@kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        bhelgaas@google.com, isimatu.yasuaki@jp.fujitsu.com, liuj97@gmail.com,
        srivatsa.bhat@linux.vnet.ibm.com, prarit@redhat.com,
        imammedo@redhat.com, vijaymohan.pandarathil@hp.com,
        shuahkhan@gmail.com
Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2012 09:55:34 -0600
In-Reply-To: <1342741437.3010.275.camel@misato.fc.hp.com>
References: <1342644027-19559-1-git-send-email-toshi.kani@hp.com>
	 <1342644027-19559-2-git-send-email-toshi.kani@hp.com>
	 <1342648771.5138.37.camel@lorien2>
	 <1342650386.3010.55.camel@misato.fc.hp.com>
	 <1342651257.5138.44.camel@lorien2>
	 <1342651966.3010.66.camel@misato.fc.hp.com>
	 <1342653482.5138.56.camel@lorien2>
	 <1342658296.3010.136.camel@misato.fc.hp.com>
	 <1342714515.3100.27.camel@lorien2>
	 <1342718897.3010.188.camel@misato.fc.hp.com>
	 <1342725950.5599.7.camel@lorien2>
	 <1342731093.3010.245.camel@misato.fc.hp.com>
	 <1342737168.6809.40.camel@lorien2>
	 <1342741437.3010.275.camel@misato.fc.hp.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.3 (3.2.3-1.fc16) 
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 17:43 -0600, Toshi Kani wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 16:32 -0600, Shuah Khan wrote:
> > On Thu, 2012-07-19 at 14:51 -0600, Toshi Kani wrote:
> > 
> > > If your concern is actually a performance bottleneck in acpi_get_name()
> > > you found in the code, you should report it to the ACPI CA team.
> > 
> > I have tried my best to get you to understand the problems in bigger
> > picture your patch set can exacerbate. Looking to somebody else to fix
> > the problems doesn't help. It doesn't look like we can come to an
> > agreement here, we just have to agree to disagree.
> 
> I am not asking someone to fix it.  I tried my best to explain that
> acpi_get_name() does not lead any performance issue when it is called in
> the error paths of ACPI drivers, and why we have to call it to obtain an
> object path info for error analysis.  If you still believe there is a
> performance issue in calling acpi_get_name() under this context, please
> help us understand where the performance bottleneck is in the code.  (I
> hope you just concerned it because it has "acpi_" prefix...) I will then
> work on the issue with the ACPI CA team.

I have measured acpi_pr_<level>() to make sure my statement is correct.
Here are the results:

Avg. acpi_get_name()		 587 ns
Avg. printk()			3420 ns
Avg. kfree()			 238 ns
Avg. acpi_get_time()+kfree()	 825 ns

The results indicate that acpi_pr_<level>() has 20% increase of the time
compared to the regular printk(), which is less than 1 us.  I believe
the results endorse my statement, and may not cause any performance
issue to the error paths of the ACPI drivers.

-Toshi


> Thanks,
> -Toshi
> 
> 
> 
> > caio,
> > -- Shuah
> > 
>