Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753786AbYKHATt (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Nov 2008 19:19:49 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752403AbYKHATk (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Nov 2008 19:19:40 -0500 Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:49498 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752312AbYKHATj (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Nov 2008 19:19:39 -0500 Message-ID: <4914DAEE.2050301@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2008 19:18:54 -0500 From: Masami Hiramatsu User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.16 (X11/20080723) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrew Morton CC: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli , Jim Keniston , David Miller , LKML , maneesh@in.ibm.com, Srikar Dronamraju Subject: Re: [PATCH] kprobe: increase kprobe_hash_table size References: <4914D2DE.9030603@redhat.com> <20081107155646.b375413e.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20081107155646.b375413e.akpm@linux-foundation.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1792 Lines: 58 Hi Andrew, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Fri, 07 Nov 2008 18:44:30 -0500 Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > >> Increase the size of kprobe hash table to 512. It's useful when hundreds >> of kprobes were used in the kernel because current size is just 64. >> > > "useful" is a bit vague. How big is the problem which this solves, and > how well did it solve it? For example, when probing enters and exits of syscall-related functions, we need more than 500 probes. In that case, each hlist would have 8 elements in average. With this patch, the hlist would have 1 element in average. I agree that there may be many opinions about what is the best suited size. Why I chose 512 was that I thought the table (byte) size was less than or equal 4096 even on 64-bit arch. > See, someone (me) needs to decide whether to merge this and if so, > whether to merge it into 2.6.29, 2.6.28, 2.6.27.x, 2.6.26.x and > 2.6.25.x. I'll need more information to make that decision, but I do > not have it. I think this improves performance just a bit. So I think it would not be needed for 2.6.27.x or older kernel. Thank you, > >> --- 2.6.28-rc3.orig/kernel/kprobes.c >> +++ 2.6.28-rc3/kernel/kprobes.c >> @@ -49,7 +49,7 @@ >> #include >> #include >> >> -#define KPROBE_HASH_BITS 6 >> +#define KPROBE_HASH_BITS 9 >> #define KPROBE_TABLE_SIZE (1 << KPROBE_HASH_BITS) > > -- Masami Hiramatsu Software Engineer Hitachi Computer Products (America) Inc. Software Solutions Division e-mail: mhiramat@redhat.com -- 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/