From: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>
To: peterz@infradead.org, mingo@kernel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, npiggin@suse.de, walken@google.com,
ak@suse.de, xinhui.pan@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [RFC 12/12] x86/dumpstack: Optimize save_stack_trace
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2016 21:43:43 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160629124343.GQ2279@X58A-UD3R> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <000101d1cac8$6f321c40$4d9654c0$@lge.com>
On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 04:50:37PM +0900, byungchul.park wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: xinhui [mailto:xinhui.pan@linux.vnet.ibm.com]
> > Sent: Monday, June 20, 2016 4:29 PM
> > To: Byungchul Park; peterz@infradead.org; mingo@kernel.org
> > Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; npiggin@suse.de; walken@google.com;
> > ak@suse.de; tglx@inhelltoy.tec.linutronix.de
> > Subject: Re: [RFC 12/12] x86/dumpstack: Optimize save_stack_trace
> >
> >
> > On 2016年06月20日 12:55, Byungchul Park wrote:
> > > Currently, x86 implementation of save_stack_trace() is walking all stack
> > > region word by word regardless of what the trace->max_entries is.
> > > However, it's unnecessary to walk after already fulfilling caller's
> > > requirement, say, if trace->nr_entries >= trace->max_entries is true.
> > >
> > > For example, CONFIG_LOCKDEP_CROSSRELEASE implementation calls
> > > save_stack_trace() with max_entries = 5 frequently. I measured its
> > > overhead and printed its difference of sched_clock() with my QEMU x86
> > > machine.
> > >
> > > The latency was improved over 70% when trace->max_entries = 5.
> > >
> > [snip]
> >
> > > +static int save_stack_end(void *data)
> > > +{
> > > + struct stack_trace *trace = data;
> > > + return trace->nr_entries >= trace->max_entries;
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > static const struct stacktrace_ops save_stack_ops = {
> > > .stack = save_stack_stack,
> > > .address = save_stack_address,
> > then why not check the return value of ->address(), -1 indicate there is
> > no room to store any pointer.
>
> Hello,
>
> Indeed. It also looks good to me even though it has to propagate the condition
> between callback functions. I will modify it if it's better.
Do you also think it would be better to make it propagate the result of
->address() rather than add a new callback, say, end_walk?
>
> Thank you.
> Byungchul
>
> >
> > > .walk_stack = print_context_stack,
> > > + .end_walk = save_stack_end,
> > > };
> > >
> > > static const struct stacktrace_ops save_stack_ops_nosched = {
> > >
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-06-29 12:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-06-20 4:55 [RFC 00/12] lockdep: Implement crossrelease feature Byungchul Park
2016-06-20 4:55 ` [RFC 01/12] lockdep: Refactor lookup_chain_cache() Byungchul Park
2016-06-20 4:55 ` [RFC 02/12] lockdep: Add a function building a chain between two hlocks Byungchul Park
2016-06-20 4:55 ` [RFC 03/12] lockdep: Make check_prev_add can use a stack_trace of other context Byungchul Park
2016-06-20 4:55 ` [RFC 04/12] lockdep: Make save_trace can copy from other stack_trace Byungchul Park
2016-06-20 4:55 ` [RFC 05/12] lockdep: Implement crossrelease feature Byungchul Park
2016-06-30 13:03 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-06-30 23:28 ` Byungchul Park
2016-06-20 4:55 ` [RFC 06/12] lockdep: Apply crossrelease to completion Byungchul Park
2016-06-20 4:55 ` [RFC 07/12] pagemap.h: Remove trailing white space Byungchul Park
2016-06-20 4:55 ` [RFC 08/12] lockdep: Apply crossrelease to PG_locked lock Byungchul Park
2016-06-30 13:04 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-06-30 23:21 ` Byungchul Park
2016-07-01 8:10 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-07-01 11:18 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2016-07-04 4:30 ` Byungchul Park
2016-06-20 4:55 ` [RFC 09/12] cifs/file.c: Remove trailing white space Byungchul Park
2016-06-20 4:55 ` [RFC 10/12] mm/swap_state.c: " Byungchul Park
2016-06-20 4:55 ` [RFC 11/12] lockdep: Call lock_acquire(release) when accessing PG_locked manually Byungchul Park
2016-06-20 4:55 ` [RFC 12/12] x86/dumpstack: Optimize save_stack_trace Byungchul Park
2016-06-20 7:29 ` xinhui
2016-06-20 7:50 ` byungchul.park
2016-06-29 12:43 ` Byungchul Park [this message]
2016-06-30 10:38 ` xinhui
2016-06-30 23:06 ` Byungchul Park
2016-06-23 23:37 ` [RFC 00/12] lockdep: Implement crossrelease feature Byungchul Park
2016-06-24 7:08 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-06-24 11:13 ` Byungchul Park
2016-06-24 11:26 ` Nikolay Borisov
2016-06-27 1:34 ` Byungchul Park
2016-07-01 4:15 ` [PATCH] lockdep: Add a document describing " Byungchul Park
2016-07-01 10:45 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-07-04 6:42 ` Byungchul Park
2016-07-06 0:49 ` Boqun Feng
2016-07-06 2:17 ` Byungchul Park
2016-07-06 5:33 ` Byungchul Park
2016-07-06 7:56 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-07-06 8:12 ` Byungchul Park
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=20160629124343.GQ2279@X58A-UD3R \
--to=byungchul.park@lge.com \
--cc=ak@suse.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=npiggin@suse.de \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=walken@google.com \
--cc=xinhui.pan@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
/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