Re: [Lse-tech] [RFT] port of Lockmeter on i386 2.5.64 Patch

[William Lee Irwin III <wli@holomorphy.com>]

On Sun, Mar 09, 2003 at 06:48:30PM -0800, Hanna Linder wrote:
> +/*
> + * Currently, the mips64 and sparc64 kernels talk to a 32-bit lockstat, so we
> + * need to force compatibility in the inter-communication data structure.
> + */
> +
> +#if defined(CONFIG_MIPS32_COMPAT)
> +#define TIME_T		uint32_t
> +#elif defined(CONFIG_SPARC32_COMPAT)
> +#define TIME_T		uint64_t
> +#else
> +#define TIME_T		time_t
> +#endif

Hmm, is there a way to inherit this from arch code?


On Sun, Mar 09, 2003 at 06:48:30PM -0800, Hanna Linder wrote:
> +#if defined(__KERNEL__) || (!defined(CONFIG_MIPS32_COMPAT) && !defined(CONFIG_SPARC32_COMPAT)) || (_MIPS_SZLONG==32)
> +#define POINTER		void *
> +#else
> +#define	POINTER		int64_t
> +#endif

What on earth? Shouldn't this be done some other way?

I really think 32-bit compatibility should be mostly ignored; userspace
should just be rearranged to understand it's looking at a 64-bit kernel
even when running in a 32-bit userspace.


On Sun, Mar 09, 2003 at 06:48:30PM -0800, Hanna Linder wrote:
> +#ifdef USER_MODE_TESTING
> +	rwlock_t    entry_lock;           /* lock for this read lock entry... */
> +	                                  /* avoid having more than one rdr at*/
> +	                                  /* needed for user space testing... */
> +	                                  /* not needed for kernel 'cause it  */
> +					  /* is non-preemptive. ............. */
> +#endif

Hmm, USER_MODE_TESTING can probably just go.


On Sun, Mar 09, 2003 at 06:48:30PM -0800, Hanna Linder wrote:
>  #define spin_unlock_irqrestore(lock, flags) \
>  do { \
> -	_raw_spin_unlock(lock); \
> +	spin_unlock(lock); \
>  	local_irq_restore(flags); \
>  	preempt_enable(); \
>  } while (0)

Erm, is this safe? there's a reason _raw_spin_unlock() is used here, for
the CONFIG_PREEMPT stuff basically. It'd look less disturbing if the old
names and semantics were preserved.


On Sun, Mar 09, 2003 at 06:48:30PM -0800, Hanna Linder wrote:
> +#ifdef DEBUG_LOCKMETER
> +		printk("put_lockmeter_info(cpu=%d): LSTAT_ON\n",THIS_CPU_NUMBER);
> +#endif

DEBUG_LOCKMETER should probably go away for merging.

All in all I'm glad to have this back. It'd be a valuable addition to
CONFIG_PROFILING once things are lined up with Linux conventions.
Despite a little bit of crustiness inherited from before ppl were used
to Linux conventions it's still pretty smooth.


-- wli