Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.kernel > #1482318 > unrolled thread

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

Started byByungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>
First post2016-09-13 12:00 +0200
Last post2016-09-13 17:00 +0200
Articles 3 — 3 participants

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.


Contents

  [PATCH v3 01/15] x86/dumpstack: Optimize save_stack_trace Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com> - 2016-09-13 12:00 +0200
    Re: [PATCH v3 01/15] x86/dumpstack: Optimize save_stack_trace Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com> - 2016-09-13 15:20 +0200
      Re: [PATCH v3 01/15] x86/dumpstack: Optimize save_stack_trace Byungchul Park <max.byungchul.park@gmail.com> - 2016-09-13 17:00 +0200

#1482318 — [PATCH v3 01/15] x86/dumpstack: Optimize save_stack_trace

FromByungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>
Date2016-09-13 12:00 +0200
Subject[PATCH v3 01/15] x86/dumpstack: Optimize save_stack_trace
Message-ID<sgSFr-6J-5@gated-at.bofh.it>
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.

Before this patch:

[    2.329573] save_stack_trace() takes 76820 ns
[    2.329863] save_stack_trace() takes 62131 ns
[    2.330000] save_stack_trace() takes 99476 ns
[    2.329846] save_stack_trace() takes 62419 ns
[    2.330000] save_stack_trace() takes 88918 ns
[    2.330253] save_stack_trace() takes 73669 ns
[    2.330520] save_stack_trace() takes 67876 ns
[    2.330671] save_stack_trace() takes 75963 ns
[    2.330983] save_stack_trace() takes 95079 ns
[    2.330451] save_stack_trace() takes 62352 ns

After this patch:

[    2.795000] save_stack_trace() takes 21147 ns
[    2.795397] save_stack_trace() takes 20230 ns
[    2.795397] save_stack_trace() takes 31274 ns
[    2.795739] save_stack_trace() takes 19706 ns
[    2.796484] save_stack_trace() takes 20266 ns
[    2.796484] save_stack_trace() takes 20902 ns
[    2.797000] save_stack_trace() takes 38110 ns
[    2.797510] save_stack_trace() takes 20224 ns
[    2.798181] save_stack_trace() takes 20172 ns
[    2.798837] save_stack_trace() takes 20824 ns

Signed-off-by: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@lge.com>
---
 arch/x86/include/asm/stacktrace.h | 1 +
 arch/x86/kernel/dumpstack.c       | 4 ++++
 arch/x86/kernel/dumpstack_32.c    | 2 ++
 arch/x86/kernel/stacktrace.c      | 7 +++++++
 4 files changed, 14 insertions(+)

diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/stacktrace.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/stacktrace.h
index 0944218..f6d0694 100644
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/stacktrace.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/stacktrace.h
@@ -41,6 +41,7 @@ struct stacktrace_ops {
 	/* On negative return stop dumping */
 	int (*stack)(void *data, char *name);
 	walk_stack_t	walk_stack;
+	int (*end_walk)(void *data);
 };
 
 void dump_trace(struct task_struct *tsk, struct pt_regs *regs,
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/dumpstack.c b/arch/x86/kernel/dumpstack.c
index ef8017c..274d42a 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/dumpstack.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/dumpstack.c
@@ -113,6 +113,8 @@ print_context_stack(struct task_struct *task,
 			print_ftrace_graph_addr(addr, data, ops, task, graph);
 		}
 		stack++;
+		if (ops->end_walk && ops->end_walk(data))
+			break;
 	}
 	return bp;
 }
@@ -138,6 +140,8 @@ print_context_stack_bp(struct task_struct *task,
 		frame = frame->next_frame;
 		ret_addr = &frame->return_address;
 		print_ftrace_graph_addr(addr, data, ops, task, graph);
+		if (ops->end_walk && ops->end_walk(data))
+			break;
 	}
 
 	return (unsigned long)frame;
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/dumpstack_32.c b/arch/x86/kernel/dumpstack_32.c
index fef917e..762d1fd 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/dumpstack_32.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/dumpstack_32.c
@@ -69,6 +69,8 @@ void dump_trace(struct task_struct *task, struct pt_regs *regs,
 
 		bp = ops->walk_stack(task, stack, bp, ops, data,
 				     end_stack, &graph);
+		if (ops->end_walk && ops->end_walk(data))
+			break;
 
 		/* Stop if not on irq stack */
 		if (!end_stack)
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/stacktrace.c b/arch/x86/kernel/stacktrace.c
index 9ee98ee..a44de4d 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/stacktrace.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/stacktrace.c
@@ -47,10 +47,17 @@ save_stack_address_nosched(void *data, unsigned long addr, int reliable)
 	return __save_stack_address(data, addr, reliable, true);
 }
 
+static int save_stack_end(void *data)
+{
+	struct stack_trace *trace = data;
+	return trace->nr_entries >= trace->max_entries;
+}
+
 static const struct stacktrace_ops save_stack_ops = {
 	.stack		= save_stack_stack,
 	.address	= save_stack_address,
 	.walk_stack	= print_context_stack,
+	.end_walk	= save_stack_end,
 };
 
 static const struct stacktrace_ops save_stack_ops_nosched = {
-- 
1.9.1

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]


#1482454

FromJosh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>
Date2016-09-13 15:20 +0200
Message-ID<sgVMZ-2qI-9@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1482318
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

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#1482560

FromByungchul Park <max.byungchul.park@gmail.com>
Date2016-09-13 17:00 +0200
Message-ID<sgXlM-3gI-29@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1482454
On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 10:18 PM, Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com> wrote:
> 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.

Hello,

You are right.

I also think this will probably be obsoleted with yours.
So I didn't modify any details of the patch.
I will take your comment into account if it becomes necessary.

Anyway, crossrelease needs this patch to work smoothly.
That's only reason why I included this patch in the thread.

Thank you,
Byungchul

> 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



-- 
Thanks,
Byungchul

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]


Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel


csiph-web