use for_each_cpu in oprofile code
PATCH 1/1 use for_each_cpu in oprofile code
Replace open coded versions with for_each_cpu()/for_each_online_cpu().
===== cpu_buffer.c 1.11 vs edited =====
cpu_buffer.c renamed from drivers/oprofile/cpu_buffer.c +4 -16
@@ -36,11 +36,8 @@ {int i; -for (i =0 ; i <NR_CPUS ; ++i) { -if (!cpu_online (i)) -continue ; +for_each_online_cpu (i)vfree (cpu_buffer[i].buffer); - } }
@@ -50,12 +47,9 @@unsigned long buffer_size = fs_cpu_buffer_size; -for (i =0 ; i <NR_CPUS ; ++i) { +for_each_online_cpu (i) {struct oprofile_cpu_buffer * b = &cpu_buffer[i]; -if (!cpu_online (i)) -continue ; - b->buffer =vmalloc (sizeof (struct op_sample ) * buffer_size);if (!b->buffer) goto fail;
@@ -94,12 +88,9 @@ timers_enabled =1 ; -for (i =0 ; i <NR_CPUS ; ++i) { +for_each_online_cpu (i) {struct oprofile_cpu_buffer * b = &cpu_buffer[i]; -if (!cpu_online (i)) -continue ; -add_timer_on (&b->timer, i); } }
@@ -111,11 +102,8 @@ timers_enabled =0 ; -for (i =0 ; i <NR_CPUS ; ++i) { +for_each_online_cpu (i) {struct oprofile_cpu_buffer * b = &cpu_buffer[i]; - -if (!cpu_online (i)) -continue ;del_timer_sync (&b->timer); }
===== oprofile_stats.c 1.8 vs edited =====
oprofile_stats.c renamed from drivers/oprofile/oprofile_stats.c +2 -8
@@ -22,10 +22,7 @@struct oprofile_cpu_buffer * cpu_buf;int i; -for (i =0 ; i <NR_CPUS ; ++i) { -if (!cpu_possible (i)) -continue ; - +for_each_cpu (i) { cpu_buf = &cpu_buffer[i]; cpu_buf->sample_received =0 ; cpu_buf->sample_lost_overflow =0 ;
@@ -49,10 +46,7 @@if (!dir)return ; -for (i =0 ; i <NR_CPUS ; ++i) { -if (!cpu_possible (i)) -continue ; - +for_each_cpu (i) { cpu_buf = &cpu_buffer[i];snprintf (buf,10 ,"cpu%d" , i); cpudir =oprofilefs_mkdir (sb, dir, buf);
PATCH 1/1 fix oprofile vfree warning on error
On error we can call __free_cpu_buffers with only some buffers allocated. I was getting a bunch of vfree warnings when I hit it, we should check before calling vfree.
drivers/oprofile/cpu_buffer.c renamed from drivers/oprofile/cpu_buffer.c~oprofile_vfree_fix +4 -2
@@ -36,8 +36,10 @@ static void __free_cpu_buffers(int num) {int i; -for_each_online_cpu (i) -vfree (cpu_buffer[i].buffer); +for_each_online_cpu (i) { +if (cpu_buffer[i].buffer) +vfree (cpu_buffer[i].buffer); + } }
_
PATCH 1/1 Speed up oprofile buffer drain code
Hi,
I noticed a large machine was doing about 400,000 context switches per second when oprofile was enabled. Upon closer inspection it looks like we were rearming the buffer sync timer without modifying the expire time.
Now that we have schedule_delayed_work_on I believe we can remove the timer completely. Each cpu should be offset by 1 jiffy so they dont all fire at the same time. I bumped DEFAULT_TIMER_EXPIRE from 2 to 10 times a second to be sure we reap cpu buffers.
With the following patch the same large machine gets about 4000 context switches per second.
John does this look OK to you? The bump of DEFAULT_TIMER_EXPIRE was pretty arbitrary, I was seeing dropped samples before but that could be due to the timer storm before I converted it to delayed work.
drivers/oprofile/cpu_buffer.c renamed from drivers/oprofile/cpu_buffer.c~oprofile_optimise +18 -29
@@ -28,8 +28,8 @@ struct oprofile_cpu_buffer cpu_buffer[NR_CPUS] __cacheline_aligned;static void wq_sync_buffer (void *); -static void timer_ping (unsigned long data); -#define DEFAULT_TIMER_EXPIRE (HZ / 2) + +#define DEFAULT_TIMER_EXPIRE (HZ / 10)int timers_enabled;static void __free_cpu_buffers (int num)
@@ -64,10 +64,6 @@ int alloc_cpu_buffers(void) b->sample_received =0 ; b->sample_lost_overflow =0 ; b->cpu = i; -init_timer (&b->timer); - b->timer.function = timer_ping; - b->timer.data = i; - b->timer.expires = jiffies +DEFAULT_TIMER_EXPIRE ;INIT_WORK (&b->work, wq_sync_buffer, b); }return 0 ;
@@ -93,7 +89,11 @@ void start_cpu_timers(void)for_each_online_cpu (i) {struct oprofile_cpu_buffer * b = &cpu_buffer[i]; -add_timer_on (&b->timer, i); +/* +* Spread the work by 1 jiffy per cpu so they dont all +* fire at once. +*/ +schedule_delayed_work_on (i, &b->work,DEFAULT_TIMER_EXPIRE + i); } }
@@ -107,7 +107,7 @@ void end_cpu_timers(void)for_each_online_cpu (i) {struct oprofile_cpu_buffer * b = &cpu_buffer[i]; -del_timer_sync (&b->timer); +cancel_delayed_work (&b->work); }flush_scheduled_work ();
@@ -203,7 +203,13 @@ void cpu_buffer_reset(struct oprofile_cp } -/* FIXME: not guaranteed to be on our CPU */ +/* +* This serves to avoid cpu buffer overflow, and makes sure +* the task mortuary progresses +* +* By using schedule_delayed_work_on and then schedule_delayed_work +* we guarantee this will stay on the correct cpu +*/ static void wq_sync_buffer (void * data) {struct oprofile_cpu_buffer * b = (struct oprofile_cpu_buffer *)data;
@@ -213,24 +219,7 @@ static void wq_sync_buffer(void * data) }sync_buffer (b->cpu); -/* don't re-add the timer if we're shutting down */ -if (timers_enabled) { -del_timer_sync (&b->timer); -add_timer_on (&b->timer, b->cpu); - } -} - - -/* This serves to avoid cpu buffer overflow, and makes sure -* the task mortuary progresses -*/ -static void timer_ping (unsigned long data) -{ -struct oprofile_cpu_buffer * b = &cpu_buffer[data]; -if (b->cpu !=smp_processor_id ()) { -printk ("Timer on CPU%d, prefer CPU%d\n" , -smp_processor_id (), b->cpu); - } -schedule_work (&b->work); -/* work will re-enable our timer */ +/* don't re-add the work if we're shutting down */ +if (timers_enabled) +schedule_delayed_work (&b->work,DEFAULT_TIMER_EXPIRE ); }
drivers/oprofile/cpu_buffer.h renamed from drivers/oprofile/cpu_buffer.h~oprofile_optimise +0 -2
@@ -12,7 +12,6 @@#include <linux/types.h> #include <linux/spinlock.h> -#include <linux/timer.h> #include <linux/workqueue.h> #include <linux/cache.h>
@@ -42,7 +41,6 @@ struct oprofile_cpu_buffer {unsigned long sample_received;unsigned long sample_lost_overflow;int cpu; -struct timer_list timer;struct work_struct work; }____cacheline_aligned ;
_
Re: [PATCH] Speed up oprofile buffer drain code
Quoted 1 line · Anton Blanchard
John does this look OK to you?
Could we please rename timers_enable/start_cpu_timers()/end_cpu_timers() now there's no timer?
Other than that looks great.
thanks
john
Re: [PATCH] fix oprofile vfree warning on error
In reply to Anton BlanchardQuoted 3 lines · Anton Blanchard
On error we can call
__free_cpu_bufferswith only some buffers allocated. I was getting a bunch of vfree warnings when I hit it, we should check before calling vfree.
Why does vfree() differ from free() / kfree() in not accepting NULL ? This seems like an interface wart.
cheers
john
Quoted 6 lines
drivers/oprofile/cpu_buffer.c renamed from drivers/oprofile/cpu_buffer.c~oprofile_vfree_fix +4
-2-for_each_online_cpu (i) -vfree (cpu_buffer[i].buffer); +for_each_online_cpu (i) { +if (cpu_buffer[i].buffer) +vfree (cpu_buffer[i].buffer); + }
Re: [PATCH] fix oprofile vfree warning on error
Quoted 3 lines
Why does
vfree()differ fromfree()/kfree()in not accepting NULL ? This seems like an interface wart.
No idea, it does seem wrong to have this difference between kfree and vfree.
Anton