mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Hitoshi Mitake <mitake@dcl.info.waseda.ac.jp>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat.com>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>, Li Zefan <lizf@cn.fujitsu.com>,
	Lai Jiangshan <laijs@cn.fujitsu.com>,
	Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@redhat.com>,
	Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] lockdep: Move lock events under lockdep recursion protection
Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2010 16:18:58 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4B95F662.4090401@dcl.info.waseda.ac.jp> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1267599302-2886-2-git-send-regression-fweisbec@gmail.com>

On 03/03/10 15:55, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> There are rcu locked read side areas in the path where we submit
> a trace event. And these rcu_read_(un)lock() trigger lock events,
> which create recursive events.
>
> One pair in do_perf_sw_event:
>
> __lock_acquire
>        |
>        |--96.11%-- lock_acquire
>        |          |
>        |          |--27.21%-- do_perf_sw_event
>        |          |          perf_tp_event
>        |          |          |
>        |          |          |--49.62%-- ftrace_profile_lock_release
>        |          |          |          lock_release
>        |          |          |          |
>        |          |          |          |--33.85%-- _raw_spin_unlock
>
> Another pair in perf_output_begin/end:
>
> __lock_acquire
>        |--23.40%-- perf_output_begin
>        |          |          __perf_event_overflow
>        |          |          perf_swevent_overflow
>        |          |          perf_swevent_add
>        |          |          perf_swevent_ctx_event
>        |          |          do_perf_sw_event
>        |          |          perf_tp_event
>        |          |          |
>        |          |          |--55.37%-- ftrace_profile_lock_acquire
>        |          |          |          lock_acquire
>        |          |          |          |
>        |          |          |          |--37.31%-- _raw_spin_lock
>
> The problem is not that much the trace recursion itself, as we have a
> recursion protection already (though it's always wasteful to recurse).
> But the trace events are outside the lockdep recursion protection, then
> each lockdep event triggers a lock trace, which will trigger two
> other lockdep events. Here the recursive lock trace event won't
> be taken because of the trace recursion, so the recursion stops there
> but lockdep will still analyse these new events:
>
> To sum up, for each lockdep events we have:
>
> 	lock_*()
> 	     |
>               trace lock_acquire
>                    |
>                    ----- rcu_read_lock()
>                    |          |
>                    |          lock_acquire()
>                    |          |
>                    |          trace_lock_acquire() (stopped)
>                    |          |
> 		  |          lockdep analyze
>                    |
>                    ----- rcu_read_unlock()
>                               |
>                               lock_release
>                               |
>                               trace_lock_release() (stopped)
>                               |
>                               lockdep analyze
>
> And you can repeat the above two times as we have two rcu read side
> sections when we submit an event.
>
> This is fixed in this patch by moving the lock trace event under
> the lockdep recursion protection.

Thanks a lot, Frederic!

I tested perf lock with your patch, result is like this,

Typical scores:

before:
% sudo ./perf lock record ./perf bench sched messaging
# Running sched/messaging benchmark...
# 20 sender and receiver processes per group
# 10 groups == 400 processes run

      Total time: 3.265 [sec]
[ perf record: Woken up 0 times to write data ]
[ perf record: Captured and wrote 143.952 MB perf.data (~6289344 samples) ]

after:
% sudo ./perf lock record ./perf bench sched messaging
# Running sched/messaging benchmark...
# 20 sender and receiver processes per group
# 10 groups == 400 processes run

      Total time: 1.943 [sec]                       <--- about x1.5 faster!
[ perf record: Woken up 0 times to write data ]
[ perf record: Captured and wrote 98.161 MB perf.data (~4288734 samples) 
]   <--- size of perf.data is also reduced


  reply	other threads:[~2010-03-09  7:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-03-03  6:54 [GIT PULL] perf updates Frederic Weisbecker
2010-03-03  6:55 ` [PATCH 1/3] lockdep: Move lock events under lockdep recursion protection Frederic Weisbecker
2010-03-09  7:18   ` Hitoshi Mitake [this message]
2010-03-10  0:10     ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-03-09  8:34   ` Jens Axboe
2010-03-09  8:35     ` Jens Axboe
2010-03-10  0:05       ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-03-10 15:45         ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-03-10 15:56           ` Jens Axboe
2010-03-10 15:55         ` Jens Axboe
2010-03-09 23:45     ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-03-10 15:55       ` Jens Axboe
2010-03-03  6:55 ` [RFC][PATCH 2/3] perf: Take a hot regs snapshot for trace events Frederic Weisbecker
2010-03-03  8:38   ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-03-03 20:07     ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-03-04 19:01     ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-03-05  3:08     ` [PATCH 0/2] Perf " Frederic Weisbecker
2010-03-05  3:08     ` [PATCH 1/2] perf: Introduce new perf_save_regs() for hot regs snapshot Frederic Weisbecker
2010-03-05 15:08       ` Masami Hiramatsu
2010-03-05 16:38         ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-03-05 17:08           ` Masami Hiramatsu
2010-03-05 17:17             ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-03-05 20:55             ` [PATCH 1/2] perf: Introduce new perf_fetch_caller_regs() " Frederic Weisbecker
2010-03-05 20:55             ` [PATCH 2/2] perf: Take a hot regs snapshot for trace events Frederic Weisbecker
2010-03-05  3:08     ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-03-03 16:06   ` [RFC][PATCH 2/3] " Steven Rostedt
2010-03-03 16:37     ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-03-03 17:07       ` Steven Rostedt
2010-03-03 17:16         ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-03-03 17:45           ` Steven Rostedt
2010-03-03 20:37             ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-03-04 11:25           ` Ingo Molnar
2010-03-04 15:16             ` Steven Rostedt
2010-03-04 15:36               ` Ingo Molnar
2010-03-04 15:55                 ` Steven Rostedt
2010-03-04 21:17                   ` Ingo Molnar
2010-03-04 21:30                     ` Steven Rostedt
2010-03-04 21:37                       ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-03-04 21:52                         ` Thomas Gleixner
2010-03-04 22:01                           ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-03-04 22:02                         ` Steven Rostedt
2010-03-04 22:09                           ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-03-03  6:55 ` [PATCH 3/3] perf/x86-64: Use frame pointer to walk on irq and process stacks Frederic Weisbecker

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=4B95F662.4090401@dcl.info.waseda.ac.jp \
    --to=mitake@dcl.info.waseda.ac.jp \
    --cc=acme@redhat.com \
    --cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
    --cc=jens.axboe@oracle.com \
    --cc=laijs@cn.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lizf@cn.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=mhiramat@redhat.com \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=paulus@samba.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    /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®