From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1763309AbZBYWU2 (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Feb 2009 17:20:28 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1759496AbZBYWUL (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Feb 2009 17:20:11 -0500 Received: from ey-out-2122.google.com ([74.125.78.24]:56594 "EHLO ey-out-2122.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754810AbZBYWUI (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Feb 2009 17:20:08 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; b=PxtRlt5MqvNW72/uJX7quvp3RcTBiZyrsHDI6tg0fKpmXiGv5g2fTUwutA7kiMPPd3 rS+bYytV8tVpCY/NPFrMzWmfHvPUG03qCFRlB1jl5zy2nplv43x0GUvusI2sFtI0Dih6 wze3m5U0Nr8SJsDFwg9Mq4D8jJ6h1uOrYmKx4= Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 23:20:02 +0100 From: Frederic Weisbecker To: Mathieu Desnoyers Cc: Steven Rostedt , Jason Baron , Masami Hiramatsu , KOSAKI Motohiro , Peter Zijlstra , "Frank Ch. Eigler" , mingo@elte.hu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, acme@ghostprotocols.net Subject: Re: [PATCH] new irq tracer Message-ID: <20090225222001.GC5838@nowhere> References: <1234995035.4799.14.camel@laptop> <20090220195236.GB3104@redhat.com> <20090222123543.359C.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com> <49A5765C.2020001@redhat.com> <20090225165747.GC3123@redhat.com> <20090225173412.GA14269@Krystal> <20090225221210.GA20133@Krystal> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090225221210.GA20133@Krystal> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 05:12:10PM -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote: > * Steven Rostedt (rostedt@goodmis.org) wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, 25 Feb 2009, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote: > > > > > * Jason Baron (jbaron@redhat.com) wrote: > > > > On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 11:48:28AM -0500, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > > > > > KOSAKI Motohiro wrote: > > > > > >> /** > > > > > >> * handle_IRQ_event - irq action chain handler > > > > > >> * @irq: the interrupt number > > > > > >> @@ -354,7 +358,9 @@ irqreturn_t handle_IRQ_event(unsigned int irq, struct irqaction *action) > > > > > >> local_irq_enable_in_hardirq(); > > > > > >> > > > > > >> do { > > > > > >> + trace_irq_entry(irq); > > > > > >> ret = action->handler(irq, action->dev_id); > > > > > >> + trace_irq_exit(irq, ret); > > > > > >> if (ret == IRQ_HANDLED) > > > > > >> status |= action->flags; > > > > > >> retval |= ret; > > > > > > > > > > > > Nobdy want unnecessary redundant tracepoint. > > > > > > Please discuss with mathieu, and merge his tracepoint. > > > > > > > > > > Hmm, from the viewpoint of trouble shooting, the place of LTTng's tracepoint > > > > > is enough. However, from the same viewpoint, it should pass irq-number > > > > > to irq-exit event too, because we may lost some previous events by buffer-overflow > > > > > etc. > > > > > > > > > > trace_irq_entry(irq, NULL); > > > > > ret = _handle_IRQ_event(irq, action); > > > > > trace_irq_exit(irq, ret); > > > > > ^^^^ > > > > > > > > > > > > > the lttng tracepoints wrap the calls to _handle_IRQ_event in 3 > > > > different places. So the above suggested irq tracepoint provides the > > > > same information with 4 less tracepoints in the code. So I believe its > > > > simpler - plus we can understand which action handlers are handling the > > > > interrupt. > > > > > > > > > > The main thing I dislike about only tracing action->handler() calls is > > > that you are not tracing an IRQ per se, but rather the invocation of a > > > given handler within the interrupt. For instance, it would be difficult > > > to calculate the maximum interrupt latency for a given interrupt line, > > > because you don't have the "real" irq entry/exit events, just the > > > individual handler() calls. > > > > Then use the function_graph tracer. > > > > Sadly, the function tracer cannot be enabled on production systems. > Therefore it's not a usable solution in the context where I need this. > > Mathieu Why? If this is about the interrupt latency caused by stop_machine, I still don't understand. This latency happens before the tracing (function filter which use patching), not during tracing. > > # echo smp_apic_timer_interrupt > /debug/tracing/set_ftrace_filter > > # echo __irqentry_text_start >> /debug/tracing/set_ftrace_filter > > # echo function_graph > /debug/tracing/current_tracer > > # cat /debug/tracing/trace > > > > # tracer: function_graph > > # > > # CPU DURATION FUNCTION CALLS > > # | | | | | | | > > ------------------------------------------ > > 1) kblockd-4012 => -0 > > ------------------------------------------ > > > > 1) ==========> | > > 1) + 35.783 us | smp_apic_timer_interrupt(); > > ------------------------------------------ > > 2) kstop/2-4013 => -0 > > ------------------------------------------ > > > > 2) ==========> | > > 2) + 13.819 us | smp_apic_timer_interrupt(); > > ------------------------------------------ > > 3) kstop/3-4014 => -0 > > ------------------------------------------ > > > > 3) ==========> | > > 3) + 24.919 us | __irqentry_text_start(); > > ------------------------------------------ > > 0) kstop/0-4011 => -0 > > ------------------------------------------ > > > > 0) ==========> | > > 0) + 24.444 us | smp_apic_timer_interrupt(); > > ------------------------------------------ > > 1) -0 => bash-3899 > > ------------------------------------------ > > > > 1) ==========> | > > 1) + 13.642 us | smp_apic_timer_interrupt(); > > 2) ==========> | > > 2) + 15.014 us | smp_apic_timer_interrupt(); > > 3) ==========> | > > 3) + 31.004 us | smp_apic_timer_interrupt(); > > ------------------------------------------ > > 0) -0 => sshd-3892 > > ------------------------------------------ > > > > 0) ==========> | > > 0) + 15.655 us | __irqentry_text_start(); > > 0) ==========> | > > 0) + 37.722 us | __irqentry_text_start(); > > ------------------------------------------ > > 0) sshd-3892 => -0 > > ------------------------------------------ > > > > 0) ==========> | > > 0) + 26.139 us | __irqentry_text_start(); > > 3) ==========> | > > 3) + 27.240 us | __irqentry_text_start(); > > 3) ==========> | > > 3) + 21.987 us | __irqentry_text_start(); > > > > > > And there you have your latencies ;-) > > > > With Jasons added trace points, we could add the to the event tracer > > and those would show up as comments here. > > > > -- Steve > > > > > > > > > > > > But I agree that knowing which handler is called is important. > > > > > > How about this compromise : > > > > > > trace_irq_entry(irq, action) > > > _handle_IRQ_event() > > > for each action { > > > trace_irq_handler(action, ret); > > > ret = action->handler(irq, action->dev_id); > > > ... > > > } > > > trace_irq_exit(action_ret); > > > > > > Would that give you the information you need ? > > > > > > Here trace_irq_handler would be passed the _current_ action invoked and > > > the _previous_ action return value. Note that we should initialize > > > irqreturn_t ret to some initial value if we do this. That should keep > > > the tracing overhead minimal. > > > > > > > -- > Mathieu Desnoyers > OpenPGP key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68