From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: linux-kbuild <linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org>,
Michal Marek <mmarek@suse.cz>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@linux.intel.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: RFC: How to handle function tracing, frame pointers and -mfentry?
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2012 15:43:37 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1335555817.28106.232.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1335552399.28106.228.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com>
On Fri, 2012-04-27 at 14:46 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> Currently, function tracing selects CONFIG_FRAME_POINTER for various
> archs (including x86), as the kernel will not compile without it, if
> function tracing is enabled. But if -mfentry is available with the
> compiler, it does not have this dependency. The kernel will compile fine
> with -pg -mfentry and without frame pointers.
Just to show the difference. I ran several iterations of hackbench, on
an Intel Quad Core2 2.6GHz.
Here's the fentry code with frame pointers (tracing disabled):
Time: 2.006
Time: 2.028
Time: 2.028
Time: 1.999
Time: 2.035
Time: 2.037
Time: 2.006
Time: 1.996
Time: 2.049
Time: 1.991
Time: 2.038
Time: 2.047
Time: 2.039
Time: 2.000
Time: 2.021
Time: 2.011
Time: 2.007
Time: 2.024
Time: 2.033
Time: 2.027
Time: 2.044
And the fentry code with frame pointers disabled:
Time: 1.870
Time: 1.861
Time: 1.865
Time: 1.884
Time: 1.867
Time: 1.867
Time: 1.875
Time: 1.883
Time: 1.863
Time: 1.877
Time: 1.865
Time: 1.885
Time: 1.842
Time: 1.863
Time: 1.899
Time: 1.877
Time: 1.837
Time: 1.900
Time: 1.897
Time: 1.877
Time: 1.853
Time: 1.856
That's about a 8% difference.
-- Steve
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-04-27 19:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-04-27 18:46 RFC: How to handle function tracing, frame pointers and -mfentry? Steven Rostedt
2012-04-27 19:43 ` Steven Rostedt [this message]
2012-04-27 20:27 ` Sam Ravnborg
2012-04-27 20:31 ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-04-27 20:57 ` Steven Rostedt
2012-04-27 21:11 ` H. Peter Anvin
2012-04-27 21:27 ` Steven Rostedt
2012-04-28 8:36 ` Andi Kleen
2012-04-28 8:50 ` Sam Ravnborg
2012-04-28 9:11 ` Sam Ravnborg
2012-04-28 12:16 ` Andi Kleen
2012-04-28 16:34 ` H. Peter Anvin
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1335555817.28106.232.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com \
--to=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=hpa@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=mmarek@suse.cz \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.