Re: [PATCH] powerpc/mm: Add trace point for tracking hash pte fault | linuxppc-dev | Ratatoskr

[PATCH] powerpc/mm: Add trace point for tracking hash pte fault · Aneesh Kumar K.V <hidden> · 2015-01-20
Re: [PATCH] powerpc/mm: Add trace point for tracking hash pte fault · Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au> · 2015-01-21
Re: [PATCH] powerpc/mm: Add trace point for tracking hash pte fault · Aneesh Kumar K.V <hidden> · 2015-01-21
Re: [PATCH] powerpc/mm: Add trace point for tracking hash pte fault · Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au> · 2015-01-28
Re: [PATCH] powerpc/mm: Add trace point for tracking hash pte fault · Anton Blanchard <hidden> · 2015-02-02
Re: [PATCH] powerpc/mm: Add trace point for tracking hash pte fault · Aneesh Kumar K.V <hidden> · 2015-02-02
Re: [PATCH] powerpc/mm: Add trace point for tracking hash pte fault · Anton Blanchard <hidden> · 2015-02-02
Re: [PATCH] powerpc/mm: Add trace point for tracking hash pte fault · Aneesh Kumar K.V <hidden> · 2015-02-03
Re: [PATCH] powerpc/mm: Add trace point for tracking hash pte fault · Aneesh Kumar K.V <hidden> · 2015-02-02
Re: [PATCH] powerpc/mm: Add trace point for tracking hash pte fault · Aneesh Kumar K.V <hidden> · 2015-04-02

Re: [PATCH] powerpc/mm: Add trace point for tracking hash pte fault

From: Anton Blanchard <hidden>
Date: 2015-02-02 10:26:08

Hi,

quoted

ebizzy with -S 30 -t 1 -P gave
13627 records/s -> Without patch
13546 records/s -> With patch with tracepoint disabled

OK. So that's about -0.6%. Are we happy with that? I'm not sure.

Can you do a few more runs and see if that's a stable result.

Surprisingly large. Is CONFIG_JUMP_LABEL enabled? That should reduce the
tracepoint to just a nop.

Anton