public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@redhat.com>,
	"Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@redhat.com>,
	Hideo AOKI <haoki@redhat.com>,
	Takashi Nishiie <t-nishiie@np.css.fujitsu.com>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
	Eduard - Gabriel Munteanu <eduard.munteanu@linux360.ro>
Subject: Re: [patch 01/15] Kernel Tracepoints
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2008 10:27:11 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080715142710.GC20037@Krystal> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1216130356.12595.184.camel@twins>

* Peter Zijlstra (peterz@infradead.org) wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-07-15 at 09:25 -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> > * Peter Zijlstra (peterz@infradead.org) wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2008-07-09 at 10:59 -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> 
> > > > +#define __DO_TRACE(tp, proto, args)					\
> > > > +	do {								\
> > > > +		int i;							\
> > > > +		void **funcs;						\
> > > > +		preempt_disable();					\
> > > > +		funcs = (tp)->funcs;					\
> > > > +		smp_read_barrier_depends();				\
> > > > +		if (funcs) {						\
> > > > +			for (i = 0; funcs[i]; i++) {			\
> > > 
> > > can't you get rid of 'i' and write:
> > > 
> > >   void **func;
> > > 
> > >   preempt_disable();
> > >   func = (tp)->funcs;
> > >   smp_read_barrier_depends();
> > >   for (; func; func++)
> > >     ((void (*)(proto))func)(args);
> > >   preempt_enable();
> > > 
> > 
> > Yes, I though there would be an optimization to do here, I'll use your
> > proposal. This code snippet is especially important since it will
> > generate instructions near every tracepoint side. Saving a few bytes
> > becomes important.
> > 
> > Given that (tp)->funcs references an array of function pointers and that
> > it can be NULL, the if (funcs) test must still be there and we must use
> > 
> > #define __DO_TRACE(tp, proto, args)					\
> > 	do {								\
> > 		void *func;						\
> > 									\
> > 		preempt_disable();					\
> > 		if ((tp)->funcs) {					\
> > 			func = rcu_dereference((tp)->funcs);		\
> > 			for (; func; func++) {				\
> > 				((void(*)(proto))(func))(args);		\
> > 			}						\
> > 		}							\
> > 		preempt_enable();					\
> > 	} while (0)
> > 
> > 
> > The resulting assembly is a bit more dense than my previous
> > implementation, which is good :
> 
> My version also has that if ((tp)->funcs), but its hidden in the 
> for (; func; func++) loop. The only thing your version does is an extra
> test of tp->funcs but without read depends barrier - not sure if that is
> ok.
> 

Hrm, you are right, the implementation I just proposed is bogus. (but so
was yours) ;)

func is an iterator on the funcs array. My typing of func is thus wrong,
it should be void **. Otherwise I'm just incrementing the function
address which is plain wrong.

The read barrier is included in rcu_dereference() now. But given that we
have to take a pointer to the array as an iterator, we would have to
rcu_dereference() our iterator multiple times and then have many read
barrier depends, which we don't need. This is why I would go back to a
smp_read_barrier_depends().

Also, I use a NULL entry at the end of the funcs array as an end of
array identifier. However, I cannot use this in the for loop both as a
check for NULL array and check for NULL array element. This is why a if
() test is needed in addition to the for loop test. (this is actually
what is wrong in the implementation you proposed : you treat func both
as a pointer to the function pointer array and as a function pointer)

Something like this seems better :

#define __DO_TRACE(tp, proto, args)                                     \
        do {                                                            \
                void **it_func;                                         \
                                                                        \
                preempt_disable();                                      \
                it_func = (tp)->funcs;                                  \
                if (it_func) {                                          \
                        smp_read_barrier_depends();                     \
                        for (; *it_func; it_func++)                     \
                                ((void(*)(proto))(*it_func))(args);     \
                }                                                       \
                preempt_enable();                                       \
        } while (0)

What do you think ?

Mathieu

> 
> 

-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
OpenPGP key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F  BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68

  reply	other threads:[~2008-07-15 14:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 58+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-07-09 14:59 [patch 00/15] Tracepoints v3 for linux-next Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-07-09 14:59 ` [patch 01/15] Kernel Tracepoints Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-07-15  7:50   ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-07-15 13:25     ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-07-15 13:59       ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-07-15 14:27         ` Mathieu Desnoyers [this message]
2008-07-15 14:42           ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-07-15 15:22             ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-07-15 15:31               ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-07-15 15:50                 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-08-01 21:10                   ` Paul E. McKenney
2008-07-15 16:08                 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-07-15 16:25                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-07-15 16:51                     ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-08-01 21:10                       ` Paul E. McKenney
2008-08-02  0:03                         ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-08-02  0:17                           ` Paul E. McKenney
2008-08-01 21:10                     ` Paul E. McKenney
2008-07-15 16:26                   ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-08-01 21:10                   ` Paul E. McKenney
2008-07-15 17:50                 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-07-15 14:03       ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-07-15 14:46         ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-07-15 15:13           ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-07-15 18:22             ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-07-15 18:33               ` Steven Rostedt
2008-07-15 18:52             ` Masami Hiramatsu
2008-07-15 19:08               ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-07-15 19:02         ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-07-15 19:52           ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-07-09 14:59 ` [patch 02/15] Tracepoints Documentation Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-07-09 14:59 ` [patch 03/15] Tracepoints Samples Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-07-09 14:59 ` [patch 04/15] LTTng instrumentation - irq Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-07-09 16:39   ` Masami Hiramatsu
2008-07-09 17:05     ` [patch 04/15] LTTng instrumentation - irq (update) Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-07-09 14:59 ` [patch 05/15] LTTng instrumentation - scheduler Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-07-09 15:34   ` [patch 05/15] LTTng instrumentation - scheduler (repost) Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-07-09 15:39     ` Ingo Molnar
2008-07-09 16:00       ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-07-09 16:21     ` [patch 05/15] LTTng instrumentation - scheduler (merge ftrace markers) Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-07-09 19:09       ` [PATCH] ftrace port to tracepoints (linux-next) Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-07-10  3:14         ` Takashi Nishiie
2008-07-10  3:57           ` [PATCH] ftrace port to tracepoints (linux-next) (nitpick update) Mathieu Desnoyers
     [not found]         ` <20080711143709.GB11500@Krystal>
     [not found]           ` <Pine.LNX.4.58.0807141112540.30484@gandalf.stny.rr.com>
     [not found]             ` <20080714153334.GA651@Krystal>
     [not found]               ` <Pine.LNX.4.58.0807141153250.29493@gandalf.stny.rr.com>
2008-07-14 16:25                 ` [PATCH] ftrace memory barriers Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-07-14 16:35                   ` Steven Rostedt
2008-07-09 14:59 ` [patch 06/15] LTTng instrumentation - timer Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-07-09 14:59 ` [patch 07/15] LTTng instrumentation - kernel Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-07-09 14:59 ` [patch 08/15] LTTng instrumentation - filemap Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-07-09 14:59 ` [patch 09/15] LTTng instrumentation - swap Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-07-09 14:59 ` [patch 10/15] LTTng instrumentation - memory page faults Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-07-09 14:59 ` [patch 11/15] LTTng instrumentation - page Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-07-09 14:59 ` [patch 12/15] LTTng instrumentation - hugetlb Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-07-11 14:30   ` [patch 12/15] LTTng instrumentation - hugetlb (update) Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-07-09 14:59 ` [patch 13/15] LTTng instrumentation - net Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-07-09 14:59 ` [patch 14/15] LTTng instrumentation - ipv4 Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-07-09 14:59 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2008-07-09 17:01 ` [patch 00/15] Tracepoints v3 for linux-next Masami Hiramatsu
2008-07-09 17:11   ` [patch 15/15] LTTng instrumentation - ipv6 Mathieu Desnoyers

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=20080715142710.GC20037@Krystal \
    --to=mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=eduard.munteanu@linux360.ro \
    --cc=fche@redhat.com \
    --cc=haoki@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mhiramat@redhat.com \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=t-nishiie@np.css.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    /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