[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1321564014.3533.13.camel@frodo>
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 16:06:54 -0500
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
Cc: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] Tracepoint: introduce tracepoint() API
On Thu, 2011-11-17 at 15:50 -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> Introduce:
>
> tracepoint(event_name, arg1, arg2, ...)
>
> while keeping the old tracepoint API in place, e.g.:
>
> trace_event_name(arg1, arg2, ...)
>
> This allows skipping parameter side-effects (pointer dereference,
> function calls, ...) when the tracepoint is not dynamically activated.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
> ---
> diff --git a/include/linux/tracepoint.h b/include/linux/tracepoint.h
> index d530a44..c9c73f7 100644
> --- a/include/linux/tracepoint.h
> +++ b/include/linux/tracepoint.h
> @@ -107,6 +107,12 @@ void tracepoint_update_probe_range(struct tracepoint * const *begin,
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_TRACEPOINTS
>
> +#define tracepoint(name, args...) \
> + do { \
> + if (static_branch(&__tracepoint_##name.key)) \
> + __trace_##name(args); \
> + } while (0)
> +
> /*
> * it_func[0] is never NULL because there is at least one element in the array
> * when the array itself is non NULL.
> @@ -144,13 +150,17 @@ void tracepoint_update_probe_range(struct tracepoint * const *begin,
> */
> #define __DECLARE_TRACE(name, proto, args, cond, data_proto, data_args) \
> extern struct tracepoint __tracepoint_##name; \
> + static inline void __trace_##name(proto) \
> + { \
> + __DO_TRACE(&__tracepoint_##name, \
> + TP_PROTO(data_proto), \
> + TP_ARGS(data_args), \
> + TP_CONDITION(cond)); \
> + } \
I wrote a patch earlier today that does almost the exact same thing, but
I had more in macro part, which I would have cleaned up after the RFC. I
didn't add another static inline, but I think this approach is a little
cleaner (with the second static inline).
I didn't post mine because I was still analyzing the assembly to make
sure it did what I expected. But I got side tracked on other things (RT
related) and didn't quite finish the analysis.
Did you do a compare of kmem_cache_alloc() to see if this fixes the
reported problem?
-- Steve
> static inline void trace_##name(proto) \
> { \
> if (static_branch(&__tracepoint_##name.key)) \
> - __DO_TRACE(&__tracepoint_##name, \
> - TP_PROTO(data_proto), \
> - TP_ARGS(data_args), \
> - TP_CONDITION(cond)); \
> + __trace_##name(args); \
> } \
> static inline int \
> register_trace_##name(void (*probe)(data_proto), void *data) \
> @@ -193,7 +203,12 @@ void tracepoint_update_probe_range(struct tracepoint * const *begin,
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(__tracepoint_##name)
>
> #else /* !CONFIG_TRACEPOINTS */
> +
> +#define tracepoint(name, args...) __trace_##name(args)
> +
> #define __DECLARE_TRACE(name, proto, args, cond, data_proto, data_args) \
> + static inline void __trace_##name(proto) \
> + { } \
> static inline void trace_##name(proto) \
> { } \
> static inline int \
>
--
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