From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933377Ab3FRUC5 (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Jun 2013 16:02:57 -0400 Received: from hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com ([71.74.56.122]:27047 "EHLO hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932861Ab3FRUC4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Jun 2013 16:02:56 -0400 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.0 cv=Odoa/2vY c=1 sm=0 a=rXTBtCOcEpjy1lPqhTCpEQ==:17 a=mNMOxpOpBa8A:10 a=zqzIAArZTo8A:10 a=5SG0PmZfjMsA:10 a=IkcTkHD0fZMA:10 a=meVymXHHAAAA:8 a=KGjhK52YXX0A:10 a=6_eBa1HtGUEA:10 a=20KFwNOVAAAA:8 a=xF0oAQwB3HhRFHxWpigA:9 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 a=jEp0ucaQiEUA:10 a=rXTBtCOcEpjy1lPqhTCpEQ==:117 X-Cloudmark-Score: 0 X-Authenticated-User: X-Originating-IP: 74.67.115.198 Message-ID: <1371585773.18733.45.camel@gandalf.local.home> Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] tracing/perf: Avoid perf_trace_buf_*() in perf_trace_##call() when possible From: Steven Rostedt To: Oleg Nesterov Cc: Peter Zijlstra , Frederic Weisbecker , Ingo Molnar , Masami Hiramatsu , Srikar Dronamraju , "zhangwei(Jovi)" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 16:02:53 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20130618192218.GA19476@redhat.com> References: <20130618192218.GA19476@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.4.4-3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2013-06-18 at 21:22 +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > perf_trace_buf_prepare() + perf_trace_buf_submit(task => NULL) > make no sense if hlist_empty(head). Change perf_trace_##call() > to check ->perf_events beforehand and do nothing if it is empty. > > However, we can only do this if __task == NULL, so we also add > the __builtin_constant_p(__task) check. > > Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov > --- > include/trace/ftrace.h | 7 ++++++- > 1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/include/trace/ftrace.h b/include/trace/ftrace.h > index 8886877..04455b8 100644 > --- a/include/trace/ftrace.h > +++ b/include/trace/ftrace.h > @@ -663,6 +663,12 @@ perf_trace_##call(void *__data, proto) \ > int rctx; \ > \ > __data_size = ftrace_get_offsets_##call(&__data_offsets, args); \ > + \ > + head = this_cpu_ptr(event_call->perf_events); \ > + if (__builtin_constant_p(!__task) && !__task && \ I'm trying to wrap my head around this: __builtin_constant_p(!task) is this the same as: !__builtin_constant_p(task) Or is it the same as: __builtin_constant_p(task) ? Because that '!' is confusing the heck out of me. If !task is a constant, wouldn't task be a constant too, and if task is not a constant then I would also assume !task is not a constant as well. If this is the case, can we nuke the '!' from the builtin_consant_p(). The code is confusing enough as is. Or is it that the code is very confusing and in keeping with the coding style, you are trying to come up with new ways of adding to the confusion. Or is this your way to confuse me as much as my code has confused you? ;-) -- Steve > + hlist_empty(head)) \ > + return; \ > + \ > __entry_size = ALIGN(__data_size + sizeof(*entry) + sizeof(u32),\ > sizeof(u64)); \ > __entry_size -= sizeof(u32); \ > @@ -677,7 +683,6 @@ perf_trace_##call(void *__data, proto) \ > \ > { assign; } \ > \ > - head = this_cpu_ptr(event_call->perf_events); \ > perf_trace_buf_submit(entry, __entry_size, rctx, __addr, \ > __count, &__regs, head, __task); \ > }