From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Jason Baron <jbaron@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca,
roland@redhat.com, rth@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] RFC: jump label - (tracepoint optimizations)
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2009 23:01:39 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090903210139.GA25581@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <cover.1252007851.git.jbaron@redhat.com>
* Jason Baron <jbaron@redhat.com> wrote:
> hi,
>
> Problem:
>
> Currenly, tracepoints are implemented using a conditional. The
> conditional check requires checking a global variable for each
> tracepoint. Although, the overhead of this check is small, it
> increases under memory pressure. As we increase the number of
> tracepoints in the kernel this may become more of an issue. In
> addition, tracepoints are often dormant (disabled), and provide no
> direct kernel functionality. Thus, it is highly desirable to
> reduce their impact as much as possible. Mathieu Desnoyers has
> already suggested a number of requirements for a solution to this
> issue.
>
> Solution:
>
> In discussing this problem with Roland McGrath and Richard
> Henderson, we came up with a new 'asm goto' statement that allows
> branching to a label. Thus, this patch set introdues a
> 'STATIC_JUMP_IF()' macro as follows:
>
> #ifdef HAVE_STATIC_JUMP
>
> #define STATIC_JUMP_IF(tag, label, cond) \
> asm goto ("1:" /* 5-byte insn */ \
> P6_NOP5 \
> ".pushsection __jump_table, \"a\" \n\t" \
> _ASM_PTR "1b, %l[" #label "], %c0 \n\t" \
> ".popsection \n\t" \
> : : "i" (__sjstrtab_##tag) : : label)
>
> #else
>
> #define STATIC_JUMP_IF(tag, label, cond) \
> if (unlikely(cond)) \
> goto label;
>
> #endif /* !HAVE_STATIC_JUMP */
>
>
> which can be used as:
>
> STATIC_JUMP_IF(trace, trace_label, jump_enabled);
> printk("not doing tracing\n");
> if (0) {
> trace_label:
> printk("doing tracing: %d\n", file);
> }
>
> ---------------------------------------
>
> Thus, if 'HAVE_STATIC_JUMP' is defined (which will depend
> ultimately on the existence of 'asm goto' in the compiler
> version), we simply have a no-op followed by a jump around the
> dormant (disabled) tracing code. The 'STATIC_JUMP_IF()' macro,
> produces a 'jump_table' which has the following format:
>
> [instruction address] [jump target] [tracepoint name]
>
> Thus, to enable a tracepoint, we simply patch the 'instruction
> address' with a jump to the 'jump target'. The current
> implementation is using ftrace infrastructure to accomplish the
> patching, which uses 'stop_machine'. In subsequent versions, we
> will update the mechanism to use more efficient code patching
> techniques.
>
> I've tested the performance of this using 'get_cycles()' calls
> around the tracepoint call sites. For an Intel Core 2 Quad cpu (in
> cycles, averages):
>
> idle after tbench run
> ---- ----------------
> old code 32 88
> new code 2 4
>
>
> The performance improvement can be reproduced very reliably (using
> patch 4 in this series) on both Intel and AMD hardware.
>
> In terms of code analysis the current code for the disabled case
> is a 'cmpl' followed by a 'je' around the tracepoint code. so:
>
> cmpl - 83 3d 0e 77 87 00 00 - 7 bytes
> je - 74 3e - 2 bytes
>
> total of 9 instruction bytes.
>
> The new code is a 'nopl' followed by a 'jmp'. Thus:
>
> nopl - 0f 1f 44 00 00 - 5 bytes
> jmp - eb 3e - 2 bytes
>
> total of 7 instruction bytes.
>
> So, the new code also accounts for 2 less bytes in the instruction
> cache per tracepoint.
>
> here's a link to the gcc thread introducing this feature:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-07/msg01556.html
This looks really interesting and desired. Once GCC adds this (or an
equivalent) feature, i'd love to have your optimization in the
kernel.
> Todo:
>
> - convert the patching to a more optimal implementation (not using stop machine)
> - expand infrastructure for modules
> - other use cases?
[...]
Other usecases might be kernel features that are turned on/off via
some slowpath. For example SLAB statistics could be patched in/out
using this method. Or scheduler statistics.
Basically everything that is optional and touches some very hot
codepath would be eligible - not just tracepoints.
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-09-03 21:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-09-03 20:25 Jason Baron
2009-09-03 20:25 ` [PATCH 1/4] RFC: basic jump label implementation Jason Baron
2009-09-03 20:25 ` [PATCH 2/4] RFC: jump label example usage Jason Baron
2009-09-03 20:26 ` [PATCH 3/4] RFC: implement tracepoints on top of jump patching Jason Baron
2009-09-03 20:26 ` [PATCH 4/4] RFC: performance testing harness Jason Baron
2009-09-03 20:45 ` [PATCH 0/4] RFC: jump label - (tracepoint optimizations) Daniel Walker
2009-09-03 21:01 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2009-09-03 21:11 ` Roland McGrath
2009-09-07 15:48 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-09-07 17:06 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2009-09-10 21:15 ` Steven Rostedt
2009-09-08 20:48 ` Jason Baron
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=20090903210139.GA25581@elte.hu \
--to=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=jbaron@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca \
--cc=roland@redhat.com \
--cc=rth@redhat.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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®