Subject: Re: [PATCH tip 0/3] Improvements of scheduler related Tracepoints
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
References: <20171214202044.1629279-1-qinteng@fb.com>
 <20171214204932.GH3326@worktop> <1632e487-ee65-b50d-85e5-82f42c69fea1@fb.com>
 <20171215073908.myx3wgka7qimcmsg@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
CC: Teng Qin <qinteng@fb.com>, <mingo@redhat.com>, <bgregg@netflix.com>,
        <daniel@iogearbox.net>, <yhs@fb.com>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        <Kernel-team@fb.com>
From: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@fb.com>
Message-ID: <e3777c2d-f267-b0cc-28ab-6c41e87c4ee7@fb.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2017 09:09:51 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:45.0)
 Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20171215073908.myx3wgka7qimcmsg@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
SpamDiagnosticOutput: 1:99
SpamDiagnosticMetadata: NSPM
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 15 Dec 2017 17:09:55.7383 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 96b825e4-c3ed-4f9e-7a30-08d543deaaa7
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Id: 8ae927fe-1255-47a7-a2af-5f3a069daaa2
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DM3PR15MB0972
X-OriginatorOrg: fb.com
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:,, definitions=2017-12-15_06:,,
 signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Reason: safe
X-FB-Internal: Safe
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 2625
Lines: 63

On 12/14/17 11:39 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 07:16:00PM -0800, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
>> On 12/14/17 12:49 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>> On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 12:20:41PM -0800, Teng Qin wrote:
>>>> This set of commits attempts to improve three scheduler related
>>>> Tracepoints: sched_switch, sched_process_fork, sched_process_exit.
>>>>
>>>> Firstly, these commit add additional flag values, namely preempt,
>>>> clone_flags and group_dead to these Tracepoints, to make information
>>>> exposed via the Tracepoints more useful and complete.
>>>>
>>>> Secondly, these commits exposes task_struct pointers in these
>>>> Tracepoints. The task_struct pointers are arguments of the Tracepoints
>>>> and currently only used to compute struct field values. But for BPF
>>>> programs attached to these Tracepoints, we may want to read additional
>>>> task information via the task_struct pointers. This is currently either
>>>> impossible, or we have to make assumption of whether the Tracepoint is
>>>> running from previous / parent or next / child, and use current pointer
>>>> instead. Exposing the task_struct pointers explicitly makes such use
>>>> case easier and more reliable.
>>>>
>>>
>>> NAK
>>
>> not sure what is the concern here.
>> Is it first or second part of the above ?
>
> Definitely the second, but also the first. You know I would have ripped
> out all scheduler tracepoints if I could have. They're a pain in the
> arse.
>
> A lot of people want to add to the tracepoints, with the end result that
> they'll end up a big bloated pile of useless crap. The first part is
> just the pieces you want added.
>
> As to the second, that's complete crap; that just makes everything
> slower for bodies benefit. If you register a traceprobe you already get
> access to these things.
>
> I think your problem is that you use perf to get access to the
> tracepoints, which them means you have to do disgusting things like
> this.

yeah. Currently bpf progs are called at the end of
perf_trace_##call()
{
   .. regular tracepoint copy craft
   perf_trace_run_bpf_submit( &copied args )
}

from bpf pov we'd rather get access to raw args passed into
perf_trace_##call.
Sounds like you're suggesting to let bpf side register its
progs directly via tracepoint_probe_register() ?
That would solve the whole thing really nicely indeed.

How such api would look like ?
Something like extending kprobe/uprobe fd-based perf_event_open?
https://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg470567.html
btw could you please apply that set to tip tree
or you want us to route it via bpf-next -> net-next ?

Thanks