From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To: Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@gmail.com>
Cc: Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@google.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>,
Daniel Jordan <daniel.m.jordan@oracle.com>,
Davidlohr Bueso <dbueso@suse.de>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mmap_lock: add tracepoints around lock acquisition
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2020 12:51:13 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200922125113.12ef1e03@gandalf.local.home> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALOAHbBr=ASfvHw1ZscWBE=CY-e7sBrLV0F5Ow=g1UGxmQsWcw@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, 22 Sep 2020 12:09:19 +0800
Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Are there any methods to avoid un-inlining these wrappers ?
> > >
> > > For example,
> > > // include/linux/mmap_lock.h
> > >
> > > void mmap_lock_start_trace_wrapper();
> > > void mmap_lock_acquire_trace_wrapper();
> > >
> > > static inline void mmap_write_lock(struct mm_struct *mm)
> > > {
> > > mmap_lock_start_trace_wrapper();
> > > down_write(&mm->mmap_lock);
> > > mmap_lock_acquire_trace_wrapper();
> > > }
> > >
> > > // mm/mmap_lock.c
> > > void mmap_lock_start_trace_wrapper()
> > > {
> > > trace_mmap_lock_start();
> > > }
> > >
> > > void mmap_lock_start_trace_wrapper()
> > > {
> > > trace_mmap_lock_acquired();
> > > }
> >
> > We can do something like that, but I don't think it would end up being better.
> >
> > At the end of the day, because the trace stuff cannot be in the
> > header, we have to add an extra function call one way or the other.
> > This would just move the call one step further down the call stack.
> > So, I don't think it would affect performance in the
> > CONFIG_MMAP_LOCK_STATS + tracepoints not enabled at runtime case.
> >
>
> Right, it seems we have to add an extra function call.
>
> > Also the wrappers aren't quite so simple as this, they need some
> > parameters to work. (the struct mm_struct, whether it was a read or a
> > write lock, and whether or not the lock operation succeeded), so it
> > would mean adding more inlined code, which I think adds up to be a
> > nontrivial amount since these wrappers are called so often in the
> > kernel.
> >
> > If you feel strongly, let me know and I can send a version as you
> > describe and we can compare the two.
> >
>
> These tracepoints will be less useful if we have to turn on the config
> to enable it.
> I don't mind implementing it that way if we can't optimize it.
>
> Maybe Steven can give some suggestions, Steven ?
>
What you can do, and what we have done is the following:
(see include/linux/page_ref.h)
#ifdef CONFIG_TRACING
extern struct tracepoint __tracepoint_mmap_lock_start_locking;
extern struct tracepoint __tracepoint_mmap_lock_acquire_returned;
#define mmap_lock_tracepoint_active(t) static_key_false(&(__tracepoint_mmap_lock_##t).key)
#else
#define mmap_lock_tracepoint_active(t) false
#endif
static inline void mmap_write_lock(struct mm_struct *mm)
{
if (mmap_lock_tracepoint_active(start_locking))
mmap_lock_start_trace_wrapper();
down_write(&mm->mmap_lock);
if (mmap_lock_tracepoint_active(acquire_returned))
mmap_lock_acquire_trace_wrapper();
}
-- Steve
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-09-22 16:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-09-17 18:13 Axel Rasmussen
2020-09-17 19:42 ` Steven Rostedt
2020-09-18 20:26 ` Axel Rasmussen
2020-09-18 20:41 ` Steven Rostedt
2020-09-23 22:07 ` Tom Zanussi
2020-09-21 4:57 ` Yafang Shao
2020-09-21 16:53 ` Axel Rasmussen
2020-09-22 4:09 ` Yafang Shao
2020-09-22 16:39 ` Axel Rasmussen
2020-09-22 16:51 ` Steven Rostedt [this message]
2020-09-23 10:04 ` Yafang Shao
2020-09-23 16:09 ` Steven Rostedt
2020-09-23 16:40 ` Axel Rasmussen
2020-09-24 4:28 ` Yafang Shao
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=20200922125113.12ef1e03@gandalf.local.home \
--to=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=axelrasmussen@google.com \
--cc=daniel.m.jordan@oracle.com \
--cc=dbueso@suse.de \
--cc=laoar.shao@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
--cc=walken@google.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