From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> To: Pekka Enberg <penberg@cs.helsinki.fi>, Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org> Cc: Li Zefan <lizf@cn.fujitsu.com>, Eduard - Gabriel Munteanu <eduard.munteanu@linux360.ro>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, "linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] perf kmem: Add more functions and show more statistics Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 08:34:26 +0100 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20091124073426.GA21991@elte.hu> (raw) In-Reply-To: <84144f020911232315h7c8b7348u9ad97f585f54a014@mail.gmail.com> * Pekka Enberg <penberg@cs.helsinki.fi> wrote: > Hi Li, > > On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 7:25 AM, Li Zefan <lizf@cn.fujitsu.com> wrote: > > Pekka, do you think we can remove kmemtrace now? > > One more use case I forgot to mention: boot time tracing. Much of the > persistent kernel memory footprint comes from the boot process which > is why it's important to be able to trace memory allocations > immediately after kmem_cache_init() has run. Can we make "perf kmem" > do that? Eduard put most of his efforts into making that work for > kmemtrace. Would be lovely if someone looked at perf from that angle (and extended it). Another interesting area would be to allow a capture session without a process context running immediately. (i.e. pre-allocate all the buffers, use them, for a later 'perf save' to pick it up.) The two are kind of the same thing conceptually: a boot time trace is a preallocated 'process context less' recording, to be picked up after bootup. [ It also brings us 'stability/persistency of event logging' - i.e. a capture session could be started and guaranteed by the kernel to be underway, regardless of what user-space does. ] Btw., Arjan is doing a _lot_ of boot time tracing for Moblin, and he indicated it in the past that starting a perf recording session from an initrd is a pretty practical substitute as well. (I've Cc:-ed Arjan.) > On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 7:25 AM, Li Zefan <lizf@cn.fujitsu.com> wrote: > > > With kmem trace events, low-level analyzing can be done using > > ftrace, and high-level analyzing can be done using perf-kmem. > > > > And chance is, more people may use and improve perf-kmem, and it > > will be well-maintained within the perf infrastructure. On the other > > hand, I guess few people use and contribute to kmemtrace-user. > > Sure, I think "perf kmem" is the way forward. I'd love to hear > Eduard's comments on this before we remove the code from kernel. Do we > need to do that for 2.6.33 or can we postpone that for 2.6.34? Certainly we can postpone it, as long as there's rough strategic consensus on the way forward. I'd hate to have two overlapping core kernel facilities and friction between the groups pursuing them and constant distraction from having two targets. Such situations just rarely end with a good solution for the user - see security modules for a horror story ... [ I dont think it will occur here, just wanted to mention it out of abundance of caution that 1.5 decades of kernel hacking experience inflicts on me ;-) ] Ingo
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> To: Pekka Enberg <penberg@cs.helsinki.fi>, Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org> Cc: Li Zefan <lizf@cn.fujitsu.com>, Eduard - Gabriel Munteanu <eduard.munteanu@linux360.ro>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, "linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] perf kmem: Add more functions and show more statistics Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 08:34:26 +0100 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20091124073426.GA21991@elte.hu> (raw) In-Reply-To: <84144f020911232315h7c8b7348u9ad97f585f54a014@mail.gmail.com> * Pekka Enberg <penberg@cs.helsinki.fi> wrote: > Hi Li, > > On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 7:25 AM, Li Zefan <lizf@cn.fujitsu.com> wrote: > > Pekka, do you think we can remove kmemtrace now? > > One more use case I forgot to mention: boot time tracing. Much of the > persistent kernel memory footprint comes from the boot process which > is why it's important to be able to trace memory allocations > immediately after kmem_cache_init() has run. Can we make "perf kmem" > do that? Eduard put most of his efforts into making that work for > kmemtrace. Would be lovely if someone looked at perf from that angle (and extended it). Another interesting area would be to allow a capture session without a process context running immediately. (i.e. pre-allocate all the buffers, use them, for a later 'perf save' to pick it up.) The two are kind of the same thing conceptually: a boot time trace is a preallocated 'process context less' recording, to be picked up after bootup. [ It also brings us 'stability/persistency of event logging' - i.e. a capture session could be started and guaranteed by the kernel to be underway, regardless of what user-space does. ] Btw., Arjan is doing a _lot_ of boot time tracing for Moblin, and he indicated it in the past that starting a perf recording session from an initrd is a pretty practical substitute as well. (I've Cc:-ed Arjan.) > On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 7:25 AM, Li Zefan <lizf@cn.fujitsu.com> wrote: > > > With kmem trace events, low-level analyzing can be done using > > ftrace, and high-level analyzing can be done using perf-kmem. > > > > And chance is, more people may use and improve perf-kmem, and it > > will be well-maintained within the perf infrastructure. On the other > > hand, I guess few people use and contribute to kmemtrace-user. > > Sure, I think "perf kmem" is the way forward. I'd love to hear > Eduard's comments on this before we remove the code from kernel. Do we > need to do that for 2.6.33 or can we postpone that for 2.6.34? Certainly we can postpone it, as long as there's rough strategic consensus on the way forward. I'd hate to have two overlapping core kernel facilities and friction between the groups pursuing them and constant distraction from having two targets. Such situations just rarely end with a good solution for the user - see security modules for a horror story ... [ I dont think it will occur here, just wanted to mention it out of abundance of caution that 1.5 decades of kernel hacking experience inflicts on me ;-) ] Ingo -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-11-24 7:34 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 53+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2009-11-24 5:25 [PATCH 0/5] perf kmem: Add more functions and show more statistics Li Zefan 2009-11-24 5:25 ` Li Zefan 2009-11-24 5:25 ` [PATCH 1/5] perf kmem: Add new option to show raw ip Li Zefan 2009-11-24 5:25 ` Li Zefan 2009-11-24 16:54 ` [tip:perf/core] " tip-bot for Li Zefan 2009-11-24 16:54 ` tip-bot for Li Zefan 2009-11-24 5:26 ` [PATCH 2/5] perf kmem: Default to sort by fragmentation Li Zefan 2009-11-24 5:26 ` Li Zefan 2009-11-24 16:55 ` [tip:perf/core] " tip-bot for Li Zefan 2009-11-24 16:55 ` tip-bot for Li Zefan 2009-11-24 5:26 ` [PATCH 3/5] perf kmem: Collect cross node allocation statistics Li Zefan 2009-11-24 5:26 ` Li Zefan 2009-11-24 16:55 ` [tip:perf/core] " tip-bot for Li Zefan 2009-11-24 16:55 ` tip-bot for Li Zefan 2009-11-24 5:26 ` [PATCH 4/5] perf kmem: Measure kmalloc/kfree CPU ping-pong call-sites Li Zefan 2009-11-24 5:26 ` Li Zefan 2009-11-24 16:55 ` [tip:perf/core] " tip-bot for Li Zefan 2009-11-24 16:55 ` tip-bot for Li Zefan 2009-11-24 5:27 ` [PATCH 5/5] perf kmem: Add help file Li Zefan 2009-11-24 5:27 ` Li Zefan 2009-11-24 16:55 ` [tip:perf/core] " tip-bot for Li Zefan 2009-11-24 16:55 ` tip-bot for Li Zefan 2009-11-24 7:15 ` [PATCH 0/5] perf kmem: Add more functions and show more statistics Pekka Enberg 2009-11-24 7:15 ` Pekka Enberg 2009-11-24 7:34 ` Ingo Molnar [this message] 2009-11-24 7:34 ` Ingo Molnar 2009-11-24 7:45 ` Pekka Enberg 2009-11-24 7:45 ` Pekka Enberg 2009-11-24 7:47 ` Ingo Molnar 2009-11-24 7:47 ` Ingo Molnar 2009-11-24 8:04 ` Li Zefan 2009-11-24 8:04 ` Li Zefan 2009-11-24 8:34 ` Ingo Molnar 2009-11-24 8:34 ` Ingo Molnar 2009-11-24 14:57 ` Arjan van de Ven 2009-11-24 14:57 ` Arjan van de Ven 2009-11-24 7:18 ` Pekka Enberg 2009-11-24 7:18 ` Pekka Enberg 2009-11-24 9:04 ` Ingo Molnar 2009-11-24 9:38 ` Li Zefan 2009-11-24 9:38 ` Li Zefan 2009-11-24 10:07 ` Ingo Molnar 2009-11-24 11:04 ` Li Zefan 2009-11-24 11:04 ` Li Zefan 2009-11-24 20:35 ` Ingo Molnar 2009-11-24 20:35 ` Ingo Molnar 2009-11-24 22:34 ` Ingo Molnar 2009-11-24 22:34 ` Ingo Molnar 2009-11-24 18:49 ` Frederic Weisbecker 2009-11-24 18:49 ` Frederic Weisbecker 2009-11-24 19:38 ` [PATCH] perf: Fix bad software/trace event recursion counting Frederic Weisbecker 2009-11-24 20:36 ` [tip:perf/core] perf_events: " tip-bot for Frederic Weisbecker 2009-11-24 20:48 ` [PATCH] perf: " Peter Zijlstra
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=20091124073426.GA21991@elte.hu \ --to=mingo@elte.hu \ --cc=arjan@infradead.org \ --cc=eduard.munteanu@linux360.ro \ --cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \ --cc=lizf@cn.fujitsu.com \ --cc=penberg@cs.helsinki.fi \ --cc=peterz@infradead.org \ /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: linkBe 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.