linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 5/6] trace: Add tracepoints to call function interrupt handlers

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]

Message-ID: <20110714230534.GF26786@somewhere.redhat.com>
Date:	Fri, 15 Jul 2011 01:05:36 +0200
From:	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
To:	Vaibhav Nagarnaik <vnagarnaik@...gle.com>
Cc:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Michael Rubin <mrubin@...gle.com>,
	David Sharp <dhsharp@...gle.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] trace: Add tracepoints to call function interrupt
 handlers

On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 04:02:49PM -0700, Vaibhav Nagarnaik wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 3:05 PM, Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 02:38:14PM -0700, Vaibhav Nagarnaik wrote:
> >> Add tracepoints to call function and call function single interrupt
> >> handlers.
> >>
> >> This is a part of overall effort to trace all the interrupts happening
> >> in a system to figure out what time is spent in kernel space versus user
> >> space.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Vaibhav Nagarnaik <vnagarnaik@...gle.com>
> >> ---
> >>  include/trace/events/irq.h |   73 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>  kernel/smp.c               |    5 +++
> >>  2 files changed, 78 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/include/trace/events/irq.h b/include/trace/events/irq.h
> >> index a2a0a49..40b19f4 100644
> >> --- a/include/trace/events/irq.h
> >> +++ b/include/trace/events/irq.h
> >> @@ -384,6 +384,79 @@ DEFINE_EVENT(reschedule_interrupt, reschedule_interrupt_exit,
> >>       TP_ARGS(ignore)
> >>  );
> >>
> >> +DECLARE_EVENT_CLASS(call_function,
> >> +
> >> +     TP_PROTO(unsigned int ignore),
> >> +
> >> +     TP_ARGS(ignore),
> >> +
> >> +     TP_STRUCT__entry(
> >> +             __field(        unsigned int,   ignore  )
> >> +     ),
> >> +
> >> +     TP_fast_assign(
> >> +             __entry->ignore = ignore;
> >> +     ),
> >> +
> >> +     TP_printk("%u", __entry->ignore)
> >> +);
> >> +
> >> +/**
> >> + * call_function_entry - called immediately after entering the
> >> + * call function interrupt handler
> >> + *
> >> + * When used in combination with the call_function_exit tracepoint
> >> + * we can determine the call function interrupt handler runtime.
> >> + */
> >> +DEFINE_EVENT(call_function, call_function_entry,
> >> +
> >> +     TP_PROTO(unsigned int ignore),
> >> +
> >> +     TP_ARGS(ignore)
> >> +);
> >
> > Looks good. But perhaps we need some disambiguation on the names, call_function is perhaps
> > too generic.
> >
> > What about trace_irq_call_function() ? Or may be something with ipi in the name, dunno.
> >
> 
> How about the following?
> call_function_ipi_(entry|exit) and
> call_function_single_ipi_(entry|exit)

Yeah sounds good!

Thanks.
--
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/