Re: [patch 09/17] LTTng instrumentation - filemap

[Nick Piggin]

On Wednesday 16 July 2008 08:26, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> Instrumentation of waits caused by memory accesses on mmap regions.
>
> Those tracepoints are used by LTTng.
>
> About the performance impact of tracepoints (which is comparable to
> markers), even without immediate values optimizations, tests done by Hideo
> Aoki on ia64 show no regression. His test case was using hackbench on a
> kernel where scheduler instrumentation (about 5 events in code scheduler
> code) was added. See the "Tracepoints" patch header for performance result
> detail.

BTW. this sort of test is practically useless to measure overhead. If
a modern CPU is executing out of primed insn/data and branch prediction
cache, then yes this sort of thing is pretty well free.

I see *real* workloads that have got continually and incrementally slower
eg from 2.6.5 to 2.6.20+ as "features" get added. Surprisingly, none of
them ever showed up individually on a microbenchmark.

OK, for this case if you can configure it out, I guess that's fine. But
let's not pretend that adding code and branches and function calls are
ever free.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/