[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1265535955.12224.17.camel@laptop>
Date: Sun, 07 Feb 2010 10:45:55 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>,
paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Hitoshi Mitake <mitake@....info.waseda.ac.jp>,
Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...hat.com>,
Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/11] tracing/perf: Fix lock events recursions in the
fast path
On Sat, 2010-02-06 at 17:10 +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
>
> > > Looks pretty what I'm looking for. Except that it still continues
> > > to fill and keep track of the locks held by the current thread,
> > > namely the copies in curr->held_locks.
> >
> > Which is exactly what you need for that lock hierarchy recording you
> > wanted :-)
>
>
> Well, the lock hierarchy should probably be retrieved from the traces,
> using state machines.
> Otherwise we would need yet other lock events for that, which is going
> to add even more overhead.
Right, well you could look at adding a mode that also strips out the
held_lock tracing, but since you really need the register class stuff to
re-generate the class mapping, avoiding the held_lock tracing doesn't
look like it's going to save you much, its all thread local storage.
--
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