Re: [RFC PATCH v4 5/7] sched, tracing: add to report task state in symbolic chars
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Date: 2023-08-02 15:08:14
Also in:
linux-perf-users, lkml
On Wed, 2 Aug 2023 08:10:00 -0400 Ze Gao [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
From: Ze Gao <redacted> Internal representations of task state are likely to be changed or ordered, and reporting them to userspace without exporting them as part of API is basically wrong, which can easily break a userspace observability tool as kernel evolves. For example, perf suffers from this and still reports wrong states as of this writing. OTOH, some masqueraded states like TASK_REPORT_IDLE and TASK_REPORT_MAX are also reported inadvertently, which confuses things even more and most userspace tools do not even take them into consideration. So add a new variable in company with the old raw value to report task state in symbolic chars, which are self-explaining and no further translation is needed. Of course this does not break any userspace tool. Note for PREEMPT_ACTIVE, we introduce 'p' to report it and use the old conventions for the rest. Signed-off-by: Ze Gao <redacted> Reviewed-by: Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@kernel.org> Acked-by: Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com> --- include/trace/events/sched.h | 44 ++++++++++++++++++++++-------------- 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)diff --git a/include/trace/events/sched.h b/include/trace/events/sched.h index 7d34db20b2c6..1c7b94793495 100644 --- a/include/trace/events/sched.h +++ b/include/trace/events/sched.h@@ -6,6 +6,7 @@ #define _TRACE_SCHED_H #include <linux/kthread.h> +#include <linux/sched.h> #include <linux/sched/numa_balancing.h> #include <linux/tracepoint.h> #include <linux/binfmts.h>@@ -214,6 +215,27 @@ static inline int __trace_sched_switch_state(bool preempt, return state ? (1 << (state - 1)) : state; } + +static inline char __trace_sched_switch_state_char(bool preempt, + unsigned int prev_state, + struct task_struct *p) +{ + long state; + +#ifdef CONFIG_SCHED_DEBUG + BUG_ON(p != current);
BUG? Why not WARN_ON()? -- Steve
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
+#endif /* CONFIG_SCHED_DEBUG */ + + /* + * For PREEMPT_ACTIVE, we introduce 'p' to report it and use the old + * conventions for the rest. + */ + if (preempt) + return 'p'; + + state = __task_state_index(prev_state, p->exit_state); + return task_index_to_char(state); +} #endif /* CREATE_TRACE_POINTS */ /*@@ -236,6 +258,7 @@ TRACE_EVENT(sched_switch, __field( int, prev_state ) __array( char, prev_comm, TASK_COMM_LEN ) __array( char, next_comm, TASK_COMM_LEN ) + __field( char, prev_state_char ) ), TP_fast_assign(@@ -246,26 +269,13 @@ TRACE_EVENT(sched_switch, __entry->prev_state = __trace_sched_switch_state(preempt, prev_state, prev); memcpy(__entry->prev_comm, prev->comm, TASK_COMM_LEN); memcpy(__entry->next_comm, next->comm, TASK_COMM_LEN); + __entry->prev_state_char = __trace_sched_switch_state_char(preempt, prev_state, prev); /* XXX SCHED_DEADLINE */ ), - TP_printk("prev_comm=%s prev_pid=%d prev_prio=%d prev_state=%s%s ==> next_comm=%s next_pid=%d next_prio=%d", - __entry->prev_comm, __entry->prev_pid, __entry->prev_prio, - - (__entry->prev_state & (TASK_REPORT_MAX - 1)) ? - __print_flags(__entry->prev_state & (TASK_REPORT_MAX - 1), "|", - { TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE, "S" }, - { TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE, "D" }, - { __TASK_STOPPED, "T" }, - { __TASK_TRACED, "t" }, - { EXIT_DEAD, "X" }, - { EXIT_ZOMBIE, "Z" }, - { TASK_PARKED, "P" }, - { TASK_DEAD, "I" }) : - "R", - - __entry->prev_state & TASK_REPORT_MAX ? "+" : "", - __entry->next_comm, __entry->next_pid, __entry->next_prio) + TP_printk("prev_comm=%s prev_pid=%d prev_prio=%d prev_state=%c ==> next_comm=%s next_pid=%d next_prio=%d", + __entry->prev_comm, __entry->prev_pid, __entry->prev_prio, __entry->prev_state_char, __entry->next_comm, + __entry->next_pid, __entry->next_prio) ); /*