[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100519141458.GA3961@Krystal>
Date: Wed, 19 May 2010 10:15:00 -0400
From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
To: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...hat.com>,
Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...otime.net>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@...ibm.com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Mark Wielaard <mjw@...hat.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Jim Keniston <jkenisto@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
"Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@...hat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Dominique Toupin <dominique.toupin@...csson.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/13] Uprobes v4
* Srikar Dronamraju (srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com) wrote:
> > * Srikar Dronamraju (srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com) wrote:
> > > Uprobes Patches
> > >
> > > Changelog from v3:
> > > - Reverted to background page replacement as suggested by Peter Zijlstra.
> >
> > Why ?
> >
> > I'm not sure we reached any concensus about the need for a background page
> > replacement.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Mathieu
> >
>
> I was tested with access_process_vm(previous patchset) and the current
> (background page replacement) and the results are the same.
>
> However Peter Zijlstra's contention still stands that we might be
> relying on a undocumented feature in the hardware
The access_process_vm scheme is in many ways similar to what kprobes has been
doing for years. So I would not rely on that as a primary argument against
the access_process_vm approach.
> and the flipping the
> pages isnt that hard or expensive.
>
> Even Linus, (http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/1/27/87) had shown inclination
> towards background page replacement.
>
> Also when uprobes implements global tracing support (i.e probing a
> particular symbol in a dso across processes), it has to rely on
> background page replacement.
Ah OK. If you have to use page replacement for global tracing, I see that as a
good argument for using page replacement everywhere.
>
> Hence I based this patchset on background page replacement rather than
> on access_process_vm. Later On, if there is a consensus on using
> access_process_vm, we can make the corresponding changes.
Well, page replacement seems like a good way to support global tracing, so I
doubt that we'll ever revert back to access_process_vm.
Thanks,
Mathieu
>
> --
> Thanks and Regards
> Srikar
--
Mathieu Desnoyers
Operating System Efficiency R&D Consultant
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com
--
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