[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100131082953.GA12715@elte.hu>
Date: Sun, 31 Jan 2010 09:29:53 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Hitoshi Mitake <mitake@....info.waseda.ac.jp>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Fr??d??ric Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
Tom Zanussi <tzanussi@...il.com>,
Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Anton Blanchard <anton@...ba.org>,
Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/12 v2] perf lock: New subcommand "perf lock", for
analyzing lock statistics
FYI, i've applied a file/line-less version of 'perf lock' to perf/core today.
The basic workflow is the usual:
perf lock record sleep 1 # or some other command
perf lock report # or 'perf lock trace'
[ I think we can do all the things that file/line can do with a less intrusive
(and more standard) call-site-IP based approach. For now we can key off the
names of the locks, that's coarser but also informative and allows us to
progress.
I've renamed 'perf lock prof' to 'perf lock report' - which is more in line
with other perf tools. ]
The tool clearly needs more work at the moment: i have tried perf lock on a 16
cpus box, and it was very slow, while it didnt really record all that many
events to justify the slowdown. A simple:
perf lock record sleep 1
makes the system very slow and requires a Ctrl-C to stop:
# time perf lock record sleep 1
^C[ perf record: Woken up 0 times to write data ]
[ perf record: Captured and wrote 5.204 MB perf.data (~227374 samples) ]
real 0m11.941s
user 0m0.020s
sys 0m11.661s
(The kernel config i used witht that is attached.)
My suspicion is that the overhead of CONFIG_LOCK_STAT based tracing is way too
high at the moment, and needs to be reduced. I have removed the '-R' option
from perf lock record (which it got from perf sched where it makes sense but
here it's not really needed and -R further increases overhead), but that has
not solved the slowdown.
'top' shows this kind of messy picture of a high-overhead system:
PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND
15003 root 20 0 28900 1116 784 R 102.2 0.0 0:14.23 perf
14981 mingo 20 0 15068 1396 880 R 85.7 0.0 0:11.67 top
15036 nobody 30 10 120m 22m 3224 R 74.4 0.1 0:04.47 cc1
15030 nobody 30 10 125m 27m 2744 R 64.6 0.1 0:03.88 cc1
20 root 20 0 0 0 0 R 53.4 0.0 0:15.04 ksoftirqd/8
7646 nobody 30 10 23488 720 264 S 51.9 0.0 0:04.96 distccd
43 root 20 0 0 0 0 R 50.2 0.0 0:06.26 events/8
15037 nobody 30 10 15696 4248 876 S 39.3 0.0 0:02.36 as
2891 nobody 30 10 23488 764 264 R 24.8 0.0 0:03.26 distccd
A couple of other details i noticed:
- 'perf lock' does not show up in the list of commands if one types 'perf'.
You can fix this by adding it to command-list.txt.
- i think we should add a reference to 'perf lock' in the config
LOCK_STAT entry's help text in lib/Kconfig.debug - so that people can see
what tool to use with lock statistics.
- perf report should be used to further reduce the overhead of
CONFIG_LOCK_STAT. If we want people to use this to tune for performance, we
want it to be exceptionally fast. Both the perf-lock-running and
perf-lock-not-running cases should be optimized. (Perhaps dynamic patching
techniques should be considered as well.)
- we waste 30 characters for the 'ID' column in perf lock report, which is in
all hexa, while no human would ever really read it, and would rarely rely
on it as well. Should be removed and only added back on option request or
so.
Thanks,
Ingo
View attachment "config" of type "text/plain" (79818 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists