From: Tom Zanussi <tom.zanussi@intel.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.cz>, Jiri Kosina <jkosina@suse.cz>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [BUG] ftrace: support for SOFT_DISABLE to syscall events caused huge slowdown of ftrace startup test
Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2013 16:32:54 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1386109974.3048.262.camel@empanada> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1386103614.3048.247.camel@empanada>
On Tue, 2013-12-03 at 14:46 -0600, Tom Zanussi wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-12-03 at 12:41 -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > On Tue, 03 Dec 2013 18:16:09 +0100
> > Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.cz> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I tested my ftrace-related patches and enabled also the startup test:
> > >
> > > CONFIG_FTRACE_SELFTEST=y
> > > CONFIG_FTRACE_STARTUP_TEST=y
> > >
> > > On today's kernel/git/tip/tip.git, the boot "freezed" for 1 minute when
> > > doing "Testing event system syscalls".
> > >
> > > A bisect pointed finger to the commit d562aff93bfb530b099 (tracing: Add
> > > support for SOFT_DISABLE to syscall events).
> > >
> > > It seems that the culprit are the "synchronize_sched" calls added to
> > > "unreg_event_syscall_enter" and "unreg_event_syscall_exit" functions.
> > > They are called 2312 times during the boot here and are responsible for
> > > the delay.
> > >
> > > I wonder if it might cause slowdown also at runtime.
> > >
> > > I am going to look deeper into the code and eventually come up with a
> > > solution. But it might take some time. I am still newbie in the kernel
> > > development. Any hints or tips are welcome ;-)
> > >
> >
> > Yeah, the synchronize_sched() at all disabling of syscall events seems
> > rather extreme. Perhaps this is good enough.
> >
> > Dose this work for you?
> >
>
> I'm also seeing a very long (~ 1 min or so) startup with
> CONFIG_FTRACE_STARTUP_TEST, but that seems to be the case with or
> without your patch, or even with the SOFT_DISABLE syscall patch
> reverted.
>
> I haven't done a comparison between any of these cases, just noting that
> unless it's expected for the ftrace startup test to take a full minute
> or so, there might be a problem somewhere else as well. Or I may be not
> testing correctly - if it was bisected to the SOFT_DISABLE commit, I'm
> guessing there's a more pronounced difference than what I'm seeing
> here...
>
OK, so the ftrace startup test does apparently take a long time in the
normal case, about 1 min on my machine, but that goes to 3 minutes with
the SOFT_DISABLE and the selftest output shows the time is in the
syscall tests.
Your patch brings that down to 1 minute again, so it does fix the
problem here, and moving the synchronize_sched() out to the tracer
deletion code instead makes more sense - I didn't realize it was so
expensive; the other case where an event handler could go away would be
in kprobes, but that's covered too via disable_trace_probe().
Acked-by: Tom Zanussi <tom.zanussi@linux.intel.com>
> Tom
>
> > Tom, do you see anything wrong with this. I'm assuming that the
> > synchronize_sched() within the event unregistering, was there for
> > deleting of trace instances. By placing the synchronize_sched() only
> > within the deletion code, this should be good enough.
> >
> > -- Steve
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
> >
> > diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_events.c b/kernel/trace/trace_events.c
> > index f919a2e..a11800a 100644
> > --- a/kernel/trace/trace_events.c
> > +++ b/kernel/trace/trace_events.c
> > @@ -2314,6 +2314,9 @@ int event_trace_del_tracer(struct trace_array *tr)
> > /* Disable any running events */
> > __ftrace_set_clr_event_nolock(tr, NULL, NULL, NULL, 0);
> >
> > + /* Access to events are within rcu_read_lock_sched() */
> > + synchronize_sched();
> > +
> > down_write(&trace_event_sem);
> > __trace_remove_event_dirs(tr);
> > debugfs_remove_recursive(tr->event_dir);
> > diff --git a/kernel/trace/trace_syscalls.c b/kernel/trace/trace_syscalls.c
> > index e4b6d11..ea90eb5 100644
> > --- a/kernel/trace/trace_syscalls.c
> > +++ b/kernel/trace/trace_syscalls.c
> > @@ -431,11 +431,6 @@ static void unreg_event_syscall_enter(struct ftrace_event_file *file,
> > if (!tr->sys_refcount_enter)
> > unregister_trace_sys_enter(ftrace_syscall_enter, tr);
> > mutex_unlock(&syscall_trace_lock);
> > - /*
> > - * Callers expect the event to be completely disabled on
> > - * return, so wait for current handlers to finish.
> > - */
> > - synchronize_sched();
> > }
> >
> > static int reg_event_syscall_exit(struct ftrace_event_file *file,
> > @@ -474,11 +469,6 @@ static void unreg_event_syscall_exit(struct ftrace_event_file *file,
> > if (!tr->sys_refcount_exit)
> > unregister_trace_sys_exit(ftrace_syscall_exit, tr);
> > mutex_unlock(&syscall_trace_lock);
> > - /*
> > - * Callers expect the event to be completely disabled on
> > - * return, so wait for current handlers to finish.
> > - */
> > - synchronize_sched();
> > }
> >
> > static int __init init_syscall_trace(struct ftrace_event_call *call)
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-12-03 22:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-12-03 17:16 [BUG] ftrace: support for SOFT_DISABLE to syscall events caused huge slowdown of ftrace startup test Petr Mladek
2013-12-03 17:41 ` Steven Rostedt
2013-12-03 20:46 ` Tom Zanussi
2013-12-03 22:32 ` Tom Zanussi [this message]
2013-12-04 12:47 ` Petr Mladek
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=1386109974.3048.262.camel@empanada \
--to=tom.zanussi@intel.com \
--cc=jkosina@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pmladek@suse.cz \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.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