Message-ID: <566A3AB2.2020700@huawei.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2015 10:53:38 +0800
From: "Wangnan (F)" <wangnan0@huawei.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: =?UTF-8?B?5bmz5p2+6ZuF5bezIC8gSElSQU1BVFXvvIxNQVNBTUk=?= 
	<masami.hiramatsu.pt@hitachi.com>,
        "'Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo'" <acme@kernel.org>
CC: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
        Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org" <linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "Namhyung Kim" <namhyung@kernel.org>,
        Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH perf/core  00/22] perf refcnt debugger API and fixes
References: <20151209021047.10245.8918.stgit@localhost.localdomain> <20151209134138.GB15864@kernel.org> <50399556C9727B4D88A595C8584AAB375264FB48@GSjpTKYDCembx32.service.hitachi.net> <56697572.90701@huawei.com> <20151210151239.GB17996@kernel.org> <50399556C9727B4D88A595C8584AAB37526515F5@GSjpTKYDCembx32.service.hitachi.net> <566A3823.9080503@huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <566A3823.9080503@huawei.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 2256
Lines: 80


On 2015/12/11 10:42, Wangnan (F) wrote:
>
>
> On 2015/12/11 10:15, 平松雅巳 / HIRAMATU，MASAMI wrote:
>> From: 'Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo' [mailto:acme@kernel.org]
>>> But this requires having these special refcnt__ routines, that will 
>>> make
>>> tools/perf/ code patterns for reference counts look different that the
>>> refcount patterns in the kernel :-\
>> BTW, I think even without the refcnt debugger, we'd better introduce 
>> this
>> kind API to unify the refcnt operation in perf code. As I said, we 
>> have many
>> miscodings on current implementation. Unifying the API can enforce 
>> developers
>> to avoid such miscodings.
>>
>> Thank you,
>>
>
> I tried this problem in another way, I'd like to share it here.
>
> First: create two uprobes:
>
> # ./perf probe --exec /home/wangnan/perf dso__new%return %ax
> Added new event:
>   probe_perf:dso__new  (on dso__new%return in /home/wangnan/perf with 
> %ax)
>
> You can now use it in all perf tools, such as:
>
>     perf record -e probe_perf:dso__new -aR sleep 1
>
> # ./perf probe --exec /home/wangnan/perf dso__delete dso
> Added new event:
>   probe_perf:dso__delete (on dso__delete in /home/wangnan/perf with dso)
>
> You can now use it in all perf tools, such as:
>
>     perf record -e probe_perf:dso__delete -aR sleep 1
>
>
> Then start test:
>
> # ./perf record -g -e probe_perf:dso__new -e probe_perf:dso__delete 
> ./perf probe vfs_read
> Added new event:
>   probe:vfs_read       (on vfs_read)
>
> You can now use it in all perf tools, such as:
>
>     perf record -e probe:vfs_read -aR sleep 1
>
> [ perf record: Woken up 1 times to write data ]
> [ perf record: Captured and wrote 0.048 MB perf.data (178 samples) ]
>
>
> From the perf report result I know two dso objects are leak:
>
> 90 probe_perf:dso__new `
> 88 probe_perf:dso__delete
>

The above result is gotten from yesterday's perf/core. I also tried
today's perf/core and get:

90 probe_perf:dso__new `
90 probe_perf:dso__delete

So we fix these leak.

Thank you.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/