Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 17 Nov 2011 18:25:34 -0500 | From | Mathieu Desnoyers <> | Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH] Tracepoint: introduce tracepoint() API |
| |
* Steven Rostedt (rostedt@goodmis.org) wrote: > 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@efficios.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'm glad you like it :)
> > 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?
I did not test it against this specific reported case, but I had this exact same kind of issue a while back when moving from Kernel Markers (which were macros) to the Tracepoint static inlines. Macros were letting the compiler optimize away the side-effects, which was not possible with static inlines only.
Eric, does it work better for you with this patch and by using tracepoint() instead of trace_...() ?
Thanks,
Mathieu
> > -- 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 \ > > > >
-- Mathieu Desnoyers Operating System Efficiency R&D Consultant EfficiOS Inc. http://www.efficios.com
| |