Thread (49 messages) 49 messages, 5 authors, 2016-11-08

Re: [PATCH v3 01/15] x86/dumpstack: Optimize save_stack_trace

From: Josh Poimboeuf <hidden>
Date: 2016-09-13 13:18:08
Also in: lkml

On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 06:45:00PM +0900, Byungchul Park wrote:
Currently, x86 implementation of save_stack_trace() is walking all stack
region word by word regardless of what the trace->max_entries is.
However, it's unnecessary to walk after already fulfilling caller's
requirement, say, if trace->nr_entries >= trace->max_entries is true.

I measured its overhead and printed its difference of sched_clock() with
my QEMU x86 machine. The latency was improved over 70% when
trace->max_entries = 5.
This code will (probably) be obsoleted soon with my new unwinder.

Also, my previous comment was ignored:

  Instead of adding a new callback, why not just check the ops->address()
  return value?  It already returns an error if the array is full. 
   
  I think that would be cleaner and would help prevent more callback
  sprawl.

-- 
Josh

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help