From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Bill Huey <billh@gnuppy.monkey.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jason Baron <jbaron@redhat.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] lockdep: lock contention tracking
Date: Mon, 21 May 2007 09:50:13 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070521075013.GA9419@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070521064150.GC4442@gnuppy.monkey.org>
* Bill Huey <billh@gnuppy.monkey.org> wrote:
> On Mon, May 21, 2007 at 08:08:28AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > To me it appears Peter's stuff is already a pretty complete solution on
> > its own, and it's a whole lot simpler (and less duplicative) than your
> > lockstat patch. Could you list the specific items/features that you
> > think Peter's stuff doesnt have?
>
> First of all, this isn't an either/or kind of thing nor should it be
> thought of in that way.
why? Please be specific.
> Precise file/function/line placement for one thing. [...]
Have you looked at the output Peter's patch produces? It prints out
precise symbols:
dcache_lock: 3000 0 [618] [<ffffffff8033badd>] _atomic_dec_and_lock+0x39/0x58
which can easily be turned into line numbers using debuginfo packages or
using gdb. (But normally one only needs the symbol name, and we
certainly do not want to burden the kernel source with tracking
__FILE__/__LINE__ metadata, if the same is already available via
CONFIG_DEBUG_INFO.)
anything else?
> [...] My stuff is potentially more extensible since I have other ideas
> for it that really are outside of the lockdep logic currently. [...]
what do you mean, specifically?
> That's why I was hessitant to completely unify with lockdep in the
> manner you suggested.
i really need specifics. Currently i have the choice between your stuff:
17 files changed, 1425 insertions(+), 80 deletions(-)
and Peter's patch:
6 files changed, 266 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
and Peter's patch (if it works out fine in testing - and it seemed fine
so far on my testbox), is smaller, more maintainable, better integrated
and thus the clear candidate for merging into -rt and merging upstream
as well. It's far cleaner than i hoped this whole lock-stats thing could
be done based on lockdep, so i'm pretty happy with Peter's current patch
already.
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-05-21 7:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-05-20 10:30 [PATCH] lockdep: lock contention tracking Peter Zijlstra
2007-05-20 18:05 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-05-21 6:04 ` Bill Huey
2007-05-21 6:08 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-05-21 6:41 ` Bill Huey
2007-05-21 7:50 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2007-05-21 9:18 ` Bill Huey
2007-05-21 9:36 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-05-21 9:55 ` Christoph Hellwig
2007-05-21 10:21 ` Bill Huey
2007-05-21 10:58 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-05-21 19:17 ` Bill Huey
2007-05-21 10:19 ` Bill Huey
2007-05-21 10:28 ` Bill Huey
2007-05-21 12:46 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-05-21 19:09 ` Bill Huey
2007-05-21 20:58 ` Jason Baron
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=20070521075013.GA9419@elte.hu \
--to=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=billh@gnuppy.monkey.org \
--cc=jbaron@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--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