From: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
To: Stefani Seibold <stefani@seibold.net>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Americo Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] update fix X86_64 procfs provide stack information for threads
Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2009 13:00:19 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20091104120019.GK31511@one.firstfloor.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1257335404.2123.29.camel@wall-e>
> This is true, but i think it is better to get an outdated value than a
> complete wrong value like -1.
-1 means "I don't know". I don't think "completely wrong"
is the correct term to describe that.
> The truth is that KSTK_ESP always return an outdated value on a multi
> core system if the process never do a system call.
I think not supporting updates on interrupts at least is very poor.
Unfortunately there's no good way fast path way to detect this I know of
(that is why I originally added -1 here)
> Question: is task_pt_regs(task)->sp set in 64 bit mode when the process
> is blocked in an interrupt? If true, we can add two additional assembly
> instruction to the system call handler and store the stack pointer into
> this. Than KSTK_ESP wil be again a simple macro like
You want to add instructions to one of the hottest kernel paths
for this hyper-obscure application? Bad idea.
> The drawback is that this will cost a litte bit performance for a litte
> bit more accuracy.
As far as I can figure out this whole proc hack is never accurate
anyways, because it can report arbitarily outdated (or completely bogus
if the process never did any system calls/interrupts) information.
My recommendation would be to just deprecate this proc field
and if anyone really wants that information they can use
a trivial ptrace() based user program.
-Andi
--
ak@linux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-11-04 12:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-11-03 7:31 Stefani Seibold
2009-11-03 8:28 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-11-03 9:06 ` Stefani Seibold
2009-11-03 18:16 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-11-05 8:19 ` [PATCH] RFC x86_64 more accurate KSTK_ESP implementation Stefani Seibold
2009-11-05 11:08 ` Andi Kleen
2009-11-05 12:11 ` Stefani Seibold
2009-11-08 11:35 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-11-08 12:51 ` Stefani Seibold
2009-11-08 12:55 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-11-08 14:00 ` Stefani Seibold
2009-11-08 16:34 ` H. Peter Anvin
2009-11-08 19:37 ` Andi Kleen
2009-11-05 13:02 ` [PATCH] fix /proc/<pid>/stat stack pointer for kernel threads Stefani Seibold
2009-11-13 8:01 ` [tip:x86/urgent] fs: " Stefani Seibold
2009-11-04 11:17 ` [PATCH] update fix X86_64 procfs provide stack information for threads Andi Kleen
2009-11-04 11:50 ` Stefani Seibold
2009-11-04 12:00 ` Andi Kleen [this message]
2009-11-04 12:22 ` Stefani Seibold
2009-11-04 15:42 ` Stefani Seibold
2009-11-04 22:21 ` Stefani Seibold
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=20091104120019.GK31511@one.firstfloor.org \
--to=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=stefani@seibold.net \
--cc=xiyou.wangcong@gmail.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
Powered by JetHome