[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170620163728.GC26710@leverpostej>
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2017 17:37:28 +0100
From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
To: Alexey Budankov <alexey.budankov@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
Kan Liang <kan.liang@...el.com>,
Dmitri Prokhorov <Dmitry.Prohorov@...el.com>,
Valery Cherepennikov <valery.cherepennikov@...el.com>,
David Carrillo-Cisneros <davidcc@...gle.com>,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/n] perf/core: addressing 4x slowdown during
per-process profiling of STREAM benchmark on Intel Xeon Phi
On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 06:22:56PM +0300, Alexey Budankov wrote:
> On 20.06.2017 16:36, Mark Rutland wrote:
> >On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 11:31:59PM +0300, Alexey Budankov wrote:
> >>On 15.06.2017 22:56, Mark Rutland wrote:
> >>>On Thu, Jun 15, 2017 at 08:41:42PM +0300, Alexey Budankov wrote:
> >>>>+static int
> >>>>+perf_cpu_tree_iterate(struct rb_root *tree,
> >>>>+ perf_cpu_tree_callback_t callback, void *data)
> >>>>+{
> >>>>+ int ret = 0;
> >>>>+ struct rb_node *node;
> >>>>+ struct perf_event *event;
> >>>>+
> >>>>+ WARN_ON_ONCE(!tree);
> >>>>+
> >>>>+ for (node = rb_first(tree); node; node = rb_next(node)) {
> >>>>+ struct perf_event *node_event = container_of(node,
> >>>>+ struct perf_event, group_node);
> >>>>+
> >>>>+ list_for_each_entry(event, &node_event->group_list,
> >>>>+ group_list_entry) {
> >>>>+ ret = callback(event, data);
> >>>>+ if (ret)
> >>>>+ return ret;
> >>>>+ }
> >>>>+ }
> >>>>+
> >>>>+ return 0;
> >>>> }
> >>>
> >>>If you need to iterate over every event, you can use the list that
> >>>threads the whole tree.
> >>
> >>Could you please explain more on that?
> >
> >In Peter's original suggestion, we'd use a threaded tree rather than a
> >tree of lists.
> >
> >i.e. you'd have something like:
> >
> >struct threaded_rb_node {
> > struct rb_node node;
> > struct list_head head;
> >};
>
> Is this for every group leader?
Yes; *every* group leader would be directly in the threaded rb tree.
> Which objects does the head keep?
Sorry, I'm not sure how to answer that. Did the above clarify?
If not, could you rephrase the question?
Thanks,
Mark.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists