From: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Cc: Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@elte.hu,
Jason Baron <jbaron@redhat.com>, rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] remove jump_label optimization for perf sched events
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 15:24:18 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4EC50B02.1060307@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1321535413.27735.35.camel@twins>
On 11/17/2011 03:10 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-11-17 at 15:00 +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
>
> > > That said, I'd much rather throttle this particular jump label than
> > > remove it altogether, some people really don't like all this scheduler
> > > hot path crap.
> > What about moving perf_event_task_sched() to sched_(in|out)_preempt_notifiers?
> > preempt notifiers checking is already on the scheduler hot path, so no
> > additional overhead for perf case.
>
> Same problem really, some people complain about the overhead of preempt
> notifiers, also not all kernels have those in.
We could combine the two, sort-circuit preempt notifiers with jump
labels if empty && not much activity on them.
> Futhermore I loathe notifier lists because they obscure wtf is done.
That's life in a general purpose kernel, if everyone gets their hook in
to keep their code clean, the scheduler will bloat.
An advantage of preempt notifiers is that you can make the perf code
modular.
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-11-17 13:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-11-17 12:30 [PATCH RFC] remove jump_label optimization for perf sched events Gleb Natapov
2011-11-17 12:49 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-11-17 13:00 ` Gleb Natapov
2011-11-17 13:10 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-11-17 13:24 ` Avi Kivity [this message]
2011-11-17 13:47 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-11-17 14:12 ` Avi Kivity
2011-11-17 13:29 ` Borislav Petkov
2011-11-17 13:47 ` Gleb Natapov
2011-11-21 13:17 ` Gleb Natapov
2011-11-24 13:23 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-11-24 13:45 ` Gleb Natapov
2011-11-24 14:18 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-11-24 17:43 ` Gleb Natapov
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=4EC50B02.1060307@redhat.com \
--to=avi@redhat.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=gleb@redhat.com \
--cc=jbaron@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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