linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/1] ftrace, workqueuetrace: Make workqueue tracepoints use TRACE

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 17 Apr 2009 15:45:57 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Zhaolei <zhaolei@...fujitsu.com>
Cc:	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Tom Zanussi <tzanussi@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/1] ftrace, workqueuetrace: Make workqueue
	tracepoints use TRACE_EVENT macro

* Zhaolei <zhaolei@...fujitsu.com> wrote:

> +TRACE_EVENT(workqueue_insertion,
> +TRACE_EVENT(workqueue_execution,
> +TRACE_EVENT(workqueue_creation,
> +TRACE_EVENT(workqueue_destruction,

I'm missing all the worklet tracepoints i suggested. (and i think 
which you had in earlier versions)

Basically, i'd suggest the following complete set of events instead:

 TRACE_EVENT(workqueue_create
 TRACE_EVENT(workqueue_flush              /* NEW */
 TRACE_EVENT(workqueue_destroy

 TRACE_EVENT(worklet_enqueue              /* NEW */
 TRACE_EVENT(worklet_enqueue_delayed      /* NEW */

 TRACE_EVENT(worklet_execute              /* instead of workqueue_execution */
 TRACE_EVENT(worklet_complete             /* NEW */

 TRACE_EVENT(worklet_cancel               /* NEW */

This allows the understanding of the life cycle of a workqueue and 
of worklets that enter that workqueue. Note the distinction between 
workqueue and worklet (work) - that is essential.

The parameters of the events are obvious, with one detail: i'd 
suggest a 'cpu' parameter to the enqueue events, to allow the 
mapping of the _on(..cpu) variants too.

I would not bother with schedule_on_each_cpu() instrumentation - 
it's rarely used.

	Ingo
--
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/