RE: Attribute spinlock contention ticks to caller.

From: Luck, Tony <tony.luck_at_intel.com>
Date: 2005-09-16 03:37:50
>This also opens the door for people submitted other special cases.

I'm very sympathetic to getting better performance data.  I agree
100% that knowing who called spinlock contention is far better than
just lumping all spinlock contention together.

But I have to agree with Stephane that this looks like the start
of a slippery slope of special cases (each of which provides two
new exported symbols).

We should look to see if there is a better way to flag address
ranges in the kernel where you'd like to bill time to the caller
rather than the function (perhaps some sort of tag table like the
extable used for copyin/copyout fault recovery?  Then we can just
export one table and have the profiler search it ... rather than
a new pair of symbols for every case.

Or you can try to convince me that spinlock contention is such
a special one off case, and we will never, ever, want to do this
anywhere else.

-Tony
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Received on Fri Sep 16 03:38:29 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2005-09-16 03:38:36 EST