[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <BANLkTikjbggOatoiv1pcXq+5n+HzWz7Wiw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 17 May 2011 10:00:12 +0800
From: Yong Zhang <yong.zhang0@...il.com>
To: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...il.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Documentation: statistics about nested locks
On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 6:01 PM, Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...il.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
> just a little patch to the Documentation. I had some trouble understanding
> the trailing "/1" on some lock class names of lock_stat output, so I added
> something on this inside lockstat documentation.
>
> Signed-off-by: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...il.com>
>
> ---
> Documentation/lockstat.txt | 36 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> 1 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/lockstat.txt b/Documentation/lockstat.txt
> index 65f4c79..75eeb65 100644
> --- a/Documentation/lockstat.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/lockstat.txt
> @@ -12,8 +12,9 @@ Because things like lock contention can severely impact
> performance.
> - HOW
>
> Lockdep already has hooks in the lock functions and maps lock instances to
> -lock classes. We build on that. The graph below shows the relation between
> -the lock functions and the various hooks therein.
> +lock classes. We build on that (see Documentation/lockdep-design.txt).
> +The graph below shows the relation between the lock functions and the
> various
> +hooks therein.
>
> __acquire
> |
> @@ -128,6 +129,37 @@ points are the points we're contending with.
>
> The integer part of the time values is in us.
>
> +Dealing with nested locks, subclasses may appear:
> +
> +32...............................................................................................................................................................................................
> +33
> +34 &rq->lock: 13128 13128
> 0.43 190.53 103881.26 97454 3453404 0.00
> 401.11 13224683.11
> +35 ---------
> +36 &rq->lock 645
> [<ffffffff8103bfc4>] task_rq_lock+0x43/0x75
> +37 &rq->lock 297
> [<ffffffff8104ba65>] try_to_wake_up+0x127/0x25a
> +38 &rq->lock 360
> [<ffffffff8103c4c5>] select_task_rq_fair+0x1f0/0x74a
> +39 &rq->lock 428
> [<ffffffff81045f98>] scheduler_tick+0x46/0x1fb
> +40 ---------
> +41 &rq->lock 77
> [<ffffffff8103bfc4>] task_rq_lock+0x43/0x75
> +42 &rq->lock 174
> [<ffffffff8104ba65>] try_to_wake_up+0x127/0x25a
> +43 &rq->lock 4715
> [<ffffffff8103ed4b>] double_rq_lock+0x42/0x54
> +44 &rq->lock 893
> [<ffffffff81340524>] schedule+0x157/0x7b8
> +45
> +46...............................................................................................................................................................................................
> +47
> +48 &rq->lock/1: 11526 11488
> 0.33 388.73 136294.31 21461 38404 0.00
> 37.93 109388.53
> +49 -----------
> +50 &rq->lock/1 11526
> [<ffffffff8103ed58>] double_rq_lock+0x4f/0x54
> +51 -----------
> +52 &rq->lock/1 5645
> [<ffffffff8103ed4b>] double_rq_lock+0x42/0x54
> +53 &rq->lock/1 1224
> [<ffffffff81340524>] schedule+0x157/0x7b8
> +54 &rq->lock/1 4336
> [<ffffffff8103ed58>] double_rq_lock+0x4f/0x54
> +55 &rq->lock/1 181
> [<ffffffff8104ba65>] try_to_wake_up+0x127/0x25a
> +
> +Line 48 shows statistics for the first subclass (/1) of &rq->lock class,
Actually it's the second subclass because subclass starts from 0.
Thanks,
Yong
> since
> +in this case, as line 50 suggests, double_rq_lock actually acquires a
> nested
> +lock of two spinlocks.
> +
> View the top contending locks:
>
> # grep : /proc/lock_stat | head
> --
> 1.7.4.1
>
--
Only stand for myself
Powered by blists - more mailing lists