Re: [PATCH 00/10] perf/uprobe: Optimize uprobes

[Google]

On Tue, 9 Jul 2024 11:03:04 +0200
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Mon, Jul 08, 2024 at 05:25:14PM -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> 
> > Ramping this up to 16 threads shows that mmap_rwsem is getting more
> > costly, up to 45% of CPU. SRCU is also growing a bit slower to 19% of
> > CPU. Is this expected? (I'm not familiar with the implementation
> > details)
> 
> SRCU getting more expensive is a bit unexpected, it's just a per-cpu
> inc/dec and a full barrier.
> 
> > P.S. Would you be able to rebase your patches on top of latest
> > probes/for-next, which include Jiri's sys_uretprobe changes. Right now
> > uretprobe benchmarks are quite unrepresentative because of that.
> 
> What branch is that? kernel/events/ stuff usually goes through tip, no?

I'm handling uprobe patches in linux-trace tree, because it's a kind of
probes in the kernel. Actually that is not clarified that the uprobe is
handled by which tree. I had asked to handle kprobes in linux-trace, but
uprobes might not be clear. Is that OK for you to handle uprobes on
linux-trace?

Thank you,

-- 
Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@xxxxxxxxxx>