From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@fb.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 bpf-next 06/10] tracepoint: compute num_args at build
 time
Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2018 12:25:44 -0700
Message-ID: <d2db6547-f42a-524f-cab4-28233439afab@fb.com>
References: <20180328021105.4061744-1-ast@fb.com>
 <20180328130407.7476cf17@gandalf.local.home>
 <fdcb0bf0-f896-ffb3-b9de-0b17f5f70fc6@fb.com>
 <20180328133830.3d5d74d3@gandalf.local.home>
 <80d7af37-10ef-28d7-f03f-27b4b5849cd1@fb.com>
 <20180328141045.1202afeb@gandalf.local.home>
 <a5c8ff7c-8185-a3fd-89eb-45ddc099c03b@fb.com>
 <20180328145431.687643bc@gandalf.local.home>
 <842190155.225.1522264944386.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        kernel-team <kernel-team@fb.com>,
        linux-api <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>
To: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
        rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mx0a-00082601.pphosted.com ([67.231.145.42]:35164 "EHLO
        mx0a-00082601.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK)
        by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752611AbeC1T0k (ORCPT
        <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>); Wed, 28 Mar 2018 15:26:40 -0400
In-Reply-To: <842190155.225.1522264944386.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

On 3/28/18 12:22 PM, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
>
> ----- On Mar 28, 2018, at 2:54 PM, rostedt rostedt@goodmis.org wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 28 Mar 2018 11:19:34 -0700
>> Alexei Starovoitov <ast@fb.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 3/28/18 11:10 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 28 Mar 2018 11:03:24 -0700
>>>> Alexei Starovoitov <ast@fb.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I can live with this overhead if Mathieu insists,
>>>>> but I prefer to keep it in 'struct tracepoint'.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>
>>>> I'm fine with keeping it as is. We could probably use it for future
>>>> enhancements in perf and ftrace.
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps, we should just add a:
>>>>
>>>> #ifdef CONFIG_BPF_EVENTS
>>>>
>>>> Around the use cases of num_args.
>>>
>>> it sounds like a good idea, but implementation wise
>>> it will be ifdef CONFIG_BPF_EVENTS around u32 num_args;
>>> in struct tracepoint and similar double definition of
>>> DEFINE_TRACE_FN. One that uses num_args to init
>>> struct tracepoint and one that doesn't ?
>>> Feels like serious uglification of already macros heavy code.
>>> Also what it will address?
>>
>> 32bit bloat ;-)
>>
>> But I agree, it's not worth uglifying it.
>>
>> -- Steve
>>
>>> cache hot/cold argument clearly doesn't apply.
>
> In the current situation I'm fine with adding this extra field
> to struct tracepoint. However, we should keep in mind to move
> all non-required cache-cold fields to a separate section at
> some point. Clearly just this single field won't make a difference
> due to other fields and padding.

Submitted v8 where num_args is moved to bpf side.
Please ack it.