Groups > comp.os.linux.development.system > #818

Command "strace -T" introducing too much overhead

X-Received	by 2002:a05:622a:1a08:b0:403:27b2:85b5 with SMTP id f8-20020a05622a1a0800b0040327b285b5mr32096qtb.12.1690177793323; Sun, 23 Jul 2023 22:49:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received	by 2002:a05:6808:1a0e:b0:3a5:a925:826b with SMTP id bk14-20020a0568081a0e00b003a5a925826bmr8354260oib.2.1690177792926; Sun, 23 Jul 2023 22:49:52 -0700 (PDT)
Path	csiph.com!1.us.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!border-1.nntp.ord.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups	comp.os.linux.development.system
Date	Sun, 23 Jul 2023 22:49:52 -0700 (PDT)
Injection-Info	google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=2405:201:d023:3b0d:70d1:c976:96fd:3fb7; posting-account=-Ffp6woAAABjpoFQBIFeu6dv2jz5I1hd
NNTP-Posting-Host	2405:201:d023:3b0d:70d1:c976:96fd:3fb7
User-Agent	G2/1.0
MIME-Version	1.0
Message-ID	<3ca0ddc3-9e52-484b-90dd-56a18a3fdb1bn@googlegroups.com> (permalink)
Subject	Command "strace -T" introducing too much overhead
From	Pavankumar S V <pavankumarsv96@gmail.com>
Injection-Date	Mon, 24 Jul 2023 05:49:53 +0000
Content-Type	text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding	quoted-printable
Lines	21
Xref	csiph.com comp.os.linux.development.system:818

Show key headers only | View raw

Hello,

I'm trying to check the execution time of each system call invoked by my application using strace -T.

I got the trace output. But the time calculated by strace for each system call seemed inaccurate.

To confirm the accuracy, I added few usleep(100) calls in my application. usleep is calling nanosleep() syscall. I expected the strace to show the time taken by nanosleep(100000) to be around 100 microseconds. But the values shown by strace for nanosleep(100000) is around 300 microseconds. For some calls, it is even showing 7 milliseconds.

1. What is the reason for so much fluctuation in the execution time of a system call. Is this the issue with strace calculation or nanosleep(100000) is really taking a lot more than 100 microseconds to execute?

2. If the issue is because of overhead introduced by strace, then the overhead is too much and strace is not useful to calculate the time taken by system call. Is there any way to avoid the overhead of strace? If not, is there any other tool to achieve the same?

Back to comp.os.linux.development.system | Previous | Next | Find similar

Thread

Command "strace -T" introducing too much overhead Pavankumar S V <pavankumarsv96@gmail.com> - 2023-07-23 22:49 -0700

csiph-web