mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Frédéric Weisbecker" <fweisbec@gmail.com>
To: "Ingo Molnar" <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: "Steven Rostedt" <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	"Linux Kernel" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Peter Zijlstra" <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] tracing/function-return-tracer: Make the function return tracer lockless
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2008 10:27:07 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <c62985530811130127u307c359fj4c4a9a778676ba4e@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20081113092340.GJ25479@elte.hu>

2008/11/13 Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>:
>
> * Frédéric Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> 2008/11/13 Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>:
>> >
>> > * Frédéric Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> BTW I'm wondering about consistency in time capturing. When I look
>> >> into kernel/sched_clock.c I see this in introduction:
>> >>
>> >> "The clock: sched_clock_cpu() is monotonic per cpu, and should be
>> >> somewhat consistent between cpus (never more than 2 jiffies
>> >> difference)."
>> >>
>> >> Two Jiffies, that could result in a lot of inconsistency in the way
>> >> of nanosec capturing. The current task can be preempted between the
>> >> call time and the return time and I'm doing a
>> >> cpu_clock(raw_smp_processor_id) on these two times. Should I keep
>> >> the same processor_id for these two captures? But what would happen
>> >> if this cpu is shut down between these two times? One other solution
>> >> would be to plan time capture in usec but I would mostly lose the
>> >> interest of function cost measuring....
>> >>
>> >> What do you think?
>> >
>> > in practice the jitter is much lower - a couple of microseconds - up
>> > to a few dozen at most.
>> >
>> > But it's a possibility, and i think the best solution is something
>> > that Steve suggested yesterday: a /debug/tracing/trace_options flag
>> > that turns on global ordering for tracing timestamps. Something like:
>> >
>> >  echo global_timestamps > /debug/tracing/trace_options
>> >
>> > tracers could also change the default of this flag. The function-cost
>> > tracer will probably want to default to globally synchronous
>> > timestamps, while the preempt and irqsoff tracers want to default to
>> > local timestamps only.
>> >
>> > Would something like this work for you?
>> >
>> >        Ingo
>> >
>>
>>
>> But I guess this flag would apply on the timestamp inserted by the
>> ring-buffer. Unfortunately I can't use it since I have to capture
>> the clock for two times and not only during insertion in the
>> ring-buffer.
>
> i think the clock should be a property of the tracer, not of the ring
> buffer. Hence if a tracer has the option set, it will get coherent
> timestamps - including ringbuffer insertion timestamps.
>
>        Ingo
>



If so that would be suitable. And for his purpose, the ring-buffer
would propose a function for time snapshot
adapted to the current flags and that rely on sched_clock?

  reply	other threads:[~2008-11-13  9:27 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-11-12 21:47 Frederic Weisbecker
2008-11-12 22:15 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-13  8:50   ` Frédéric Weisbecker
2008-11-13  8:55     ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-13  9:16       ` Frédéric Weisbecker
2008-11-13  9:23         ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-13  9:27           ` Frédéric Weisbecker [this message]
2008-11-13  9:40             ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-13 12:36               ` Frédéric Weisbecker
2008-11-13 12:54                 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-13 12:59                   ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-11-13 13:02                     ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-13 17:26                   ` Frédéric Weisbecker
2008-11-13 18:57                     ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-13 20:06                       ` Frédéric Weisbecker
2008-11-13 14:53 ` Andi Kleen
2008-11-13 17:01   ` Frédéric Weisbecker
2008-11-13 17:12     ` Andi Kleen
2008-11-13 17:21       ` Steven Rostedt
2008-11-13 17:34         ` Andi Kleen
2008-11-13 17:32           ` Steven Rostedt
2008-11-13 17:46             ` Frédéric Weisbecker
2008-11-13 18:29             ` Andi Kleen
2008-11-13 18:35               ` Steven Rostedt
2008-11-13 18:55                 ` Andi Kleen
2008-11-13 19:03                   ` Steven Rostedt
2008-11-13 19:19                     ` Andi Kleen

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=c62985530811130127u307c359fj4c4a9a778676ba4e@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=fweisbec@gmail.com \
    --cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --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®