From: Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@cn.fujitsu.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Zhaolei <zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.com>,
mingo@elte.hu, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
fweisbec@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] ftrace: add tracepoint for timer
Date: Wed, 03 Jun 2009 10:52:37 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4A25E575.5000601@cn.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.00.0905290935030.3397@localhost.localdomain>
Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Fri, 29 May 2009, Zhaolei wrote:
>> But, for trace_timer_start() in __mod_timer(), we need to put it after
>> timer->* changed.
>
> Why ?
>
>>> + TP_fast_assign(
>>> + __entry->timer = timer;
>>> + __entry->function = timer->function;
>>> + __entry->expires = timer->expires;
>>> + __entry->cpu = cpu;
>
> Again, neither timer nor function nor expires will change when the
> timer is added, right ?
>
> The only unknown at this point is cpu. See below.
>
>> Nevertheless, it don't means we need separate trace_timer_start() and
>> debug_timer_activate(), because we can put move debug_timer_activate() below,
>> as:
>> - debug_timer_activate(timer);
>> ...
>> timer->expires = expires;
>> internal_add_timer(base, timer);
>> + debug_timer_activate(timer);
>
> No, you can not call it with the base->lock held.
>
>> + trace_timer_start(timer, smp_processor_id());
>
> Also using smp_processor_id() here is wrong. We do not necessarily add
> the timer to the current CPUs timer wheel. See the code which selects
> the timer base. So this information is rather useless, because the
> tracer knows anyway on which CPU we are running.
>
> Unfortunately we do not have an easy way to figure out to which CPU
> the base belongs (except if it's the base of the current CPU). There
> is not much we can do about that. But OTOH, this is not a problem
> because we see when the timer expires on which CPU it was enqueued. So
> scrapping the cpu entry in the trace completely is not a big loss.
>
> The same applies to hrtimers as well.
>
Hi tglx:
I also have different view here. :-)
As you say, "We do not necessarily add the timer to the current CPUs timer
wheel", but the timer is added to current CPU in __mod_timer(), selects the
timer base as below code:
new_base = __get_cpu_var(tvec_bases);
In this case, we can use smp_processor_id() to get the CPU which timer is
added.
We can not add the timer to the current CPUs by using add_timer_on(), selects
the timer base in this function as below code:
struct tvec_base *base = per_cpu(tvec_bases, cpu);
In this case, We can know the timer is added to 'cpu'.
So, I add trace_timer_start() in __mod_timer() and add_timer_on()in my patch.
In hrtimer, all timer is added to the current CPU which can be getted by using
smp_processor_id() in probe function, so it not has 'cpu' argument in my patch.
In addition, we do better not put trace_timer_start() and debug_timer_activate
in one function, have two reasons:
1: for trace_timer_start()'s logic, the timer start event is completed in
internal_add_timer(), in other words: the timer is not start before
internal_add_timer().
2: as Zhaolei says in the last mail, the timer's data may changed after
debug_timer_activate().
Thanks,
Xiao Guangrong
>
> tglx
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-06-03 2:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-05-22 9:53 [PATCH 1/3] ftrace: add tracepoint for timer Xiao Guangrong
2009-05-26 21:40 ` Thomas Gleixner
2009-05-27 7:36 ` Xiao Guangrong
2009-05-27 10:10 ` Thomas Gleixner
2009-05-29 2:00 ` Zhaolei
2009-05-29 9:55 ` Thomas Gleixner
2009-06-01 9:08 ` Zhaolei
2009-06-03 2:52 ` Xiao Guangrong [this message]
2009-06-03 16:39 ` Thomas Gleixner
2009-06-04 5:38 ` Xiao Guangrong
2009-06-04 8:44 ` Thomas Gleixner
2009-06-10 9:42 ` Xiao Guangrong
2009-06-10 10:58 ` Thomas Gleixner
2009-06-03 2:50 ` Xiao Guangrong
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=4A25E575.5000601@cn.fujitsu.com \
--to=xiaoguangrong@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=zhaolei@cn.fujitsu.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