[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1190758358.30061.13.camel@rockstar.fsl.cs.sunysb.edu>
Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2007 18:12:38 -0400
From: Avishay Traeger <atraeger@...sunysb.edu>
To: prasanna@...ibm.com, ananth@...ibm.com,
anil.s.keshavamurthy@...el.com, davem@...emloft.net
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: KPROBES: Instrumenting a function's call site
Hello,
I am trying to use kprobes to measure the latency of a function by
instrumenting its call site. Basically, I find the call instruction,
and insert a kprobe with a pre-handler and post-handler at that point.
The pre-handler measures the latency (reads the TSC counter). The
post-handler measures the latency again, and subtracts the value that
was read in the pre-handler to compute the total latency of the called
function.
So to measure the latency of foo(), I basically want kprobes to do this:
pre_handler();
foo();
post_handler();
The problem is that the latencies that I am getting are consistently low
(~10,000 cycles). When I manually instrument the functions, the latency
is about 20,000,000 cycles. Clearly something is not right here.
Is this a known issue? Instead of using the post-handler, I can try to
add a kprobe to the following instruction with a pre-handler. I was
just curious if there was something fundamentally wrong with the
approach I took, or maybe a bug that you should be made aware of.
Please CC me on any replies (not subscribed to LKML).
Thanks,
Avishay
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists