Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753119Ab1BTNAJ (ORCPT ); Sun, 20 Feb 2011 08:00:09 -0500 Received: from mx3.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.1.138]:39874 "EHLO mx3.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752434Ab1BTNAI (ORCPT ); Sun, 20 Feb 2011 08:00:08 -0500 Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2011 13:59:48 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: Masami Hiramatsu , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , =?iso-8859-1?Q?Fr=E9d=E9ric?= Weisbecker Cc: Jiri Olsa , "H. Peter Anvin" , ananth@in.ibm.com, davem@davemloft.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner , Peter Zijlstra , Eric Dumazet , "2nddept-manager@sdl.hitachi.co.jp" <2nddept-manager@sdl.hitachi.co.jp> Subject: Re: [PATCH] kprobes - do not allow optimized kprobes in entry code Message-ID: <20110220125948.GC25700@elte.hu> References: <1297696354-6990-1-git-send-email-jolsa@redhat.com> <4D5A4A66.4010503@hitachi.com> <20110215123058.GB3135@jolsa.brq.redhat.com> <4D5AA209.7070309@hitachi.com> <20110215170507.GD3135@jolsa.brq.redhat.com> <4D5B4654.30407@hitachi.com> <20110217151103.GA11156@elte.hu> <20110218162619.GA9425@jolsa.brq.redhat.com> <4D5FD04D.8020209@hitachi.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4D5FD04D.8020209@hitachi.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-08-17) X-ELTE-SpamScore: -2.0 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-2.0 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.5 -2.0 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1476 Lines: 41 * Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > Thanks, I've also tested. (But my machine has no L1-icache-prefetches* support) > What I can tell is both of L1-icache-load and L1-icache-load-misses is reduced by > the patch. ;-) That's actually a pretty interesting result: it means that compressing entry code into a single section compresses the icache footprint in a measurable way. The icache miss rate went down by about 6%: > 1,234,272 L1-icache-load-misses ( +- 0.105% ) > 1,155,816 L1-icache-load-misses ( +- 0.113% ) Which, assuming that there's no kernel build and bootup related skew effect that is larger than 2-3% means that this is an improvement. perf feature request: would be nice if it was able to do: perf stat --record ... perf diff and it would show a comparison of the two runs. In hindsight it makes sense: the patch probably reduced the fragmentation of the icache for this workload. But it's still surprising :-) Mind splitting the patch up into two parts, the first one that does the performance optimization intentionally (with numbers, explanation, etc.), the second one that uses the new section for kprobes exclusion? Thanks, Ingo -- 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/