mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: "Masami Hiramatsu" <masami.hiramatsu.pt@hitachi.com>,
	"Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo" <acme@redhat.com>,
	"Frédéric Weisbecker" <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	ananth@in.ibm.com, davem@davemloft.net,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	"Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	"Peter Zijlstra" <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
	"Eric Dumazet" <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>,
	"2nddept-manager@sdl.hitachi.co.jp"
	<2nddept-manager@sdl.hitachi.co.jp>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kprobes - do not allow optimized kprobes in entry code
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2011 12:54:52 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110221115452.GA1919@jolsa.brq.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110220125948.GC25700@elte.hu>

On Sun, Feb 20, 2011 at 01:59:48PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> * Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@hitachi.com> wrote:
> 
> > Thanks, I've also tested. (But my machine has no L1-icache-prefetches* support) 
> > What I can tell is both of L1-icache-load and L1-icache-load-misses is reduced by 
> > the patch. ;-)
> 
> That's actually a pretty interesting result: it means that compressing entry code 
> into a single section compresses the icache footprint in a measurable way. The 
> icache miss rate went down by about 6%:
> 
> >          1,234,272 L1-icache-load-misses      ( +-   0.105% )
> >          1,155,816 L1-icache-load-misses      ( +-   0.113% )
> 
> Which, assuming that there's no kernel build and bootup related skew effect that is 
> larger than 2-3% means that this is an improvement.
> 
> perf feature request: would be nice if it was able to do:
> 
> 	perf stat --record ...
> 	perf diff
> 
> and it would show a comparison of the two runs.
> 
> In hindsight it makes sense: the patch probably reduced the fragmentation of the 
> icache for this workload.
> 
> But it's still surprising :-)
> 
> Mind splitting the patch up into two parts, the first one that does the performance 
> optimization intentionally (with numbers, explanation, etc.), the second one that 
> uses the new section for kprobes exclusion?
np, I'll send v2 shortly

thanks,
jirka

> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 	Ingo

  reply	other threads:[~2011-02-21 11:55 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-02-14 15:12 [RFC,PATCH] kprobes - optimized kprobes might crash before setting kernel stack Jiri Olsa
2011-02-15  9:41 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2011-02-15 12:30   ` Jiri Olsa
2011-02-15 15:55     ` Masami Hiramatsu
2011-02-15 16:54       ` Jiri Olsa
2011-02-15 17:05       ` [PATCH] kprobes - do not allow optimized kprobes in entry code Jiri Olsa
2011-02-16  3:36         ` Masami Hiramatsu
2011-02-17 15:11           ` Ingo Molnar
2011-02-17 15:20             ` Jiri Olsa
2011-02-18 16:26             ` Jiri Olsa
2011-02-19 14:14               ` Masami Hiramatsu
2011-02-20 12:59                 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-02-21 11:54                   ` Jiri Olsa [this message]
2011-02-21 14:25                   ` [PATCH 0/2] x86: separating entry text section + kprobes fix Jiri Olsa
2011-02-21 14:25                     ` [PATCH 1/2] x86: separating entry text section Jiri Olsa
2011-02-22  3:22                       ` Masami Hiramatsu
2011-02-22  8:09                       ` Ingo Molnar
2011-02-22 12:52                         ` Jiri Olsa
2011-03-07 10:44                           ` Jiri Olsa
2011-03-07 15:29                             ` Ingo Molnar
2011-03-07 18:10                               ` Jiri Olsa
2011-03-08 16:15                                 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-03-08 20:15                                 ` [tip:perf/core] x86: Separate out " tip-bot for Jiri Olsa
2011-02-21 14:25                     ` [PATCH 2/2] kprobes: disabling optimized kprobes for " Jiri Olsa
2011-02-22  3:22                       ` Masami Hiramatsu
2011-03-08 20:16                       ` [tip:perf/core] kprobes: Disabling " tip-bot for Jiri Olsa

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=20110221115452.GA1919@jolsa.brq.redhat.com \
    --to=jolsa@redhat.com \
    --cc=2nddept-manager@sdl.hitachi.co.jp \
    --cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=acme@redhat.com \
    --cc=ananth@in.ibm.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
    --cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=masami.hiramatsu.pt@hitachi.com \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --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

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®