Message ID | 170723220474.502590.7646977373091779892.stgit@devnote2 (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
State | Superseded |
Headers | show |
Series | tracing: fprobe: function_graph: Multi-function graph and fprobe on fgraph | expand |
On Wed, 7 Feb 2024 00:10:04 +0900 "Masami Hiramatsu (Google)" <mhiramat@kernel.org> wrote: > diff --git a/kernel/trace/fgraph.c b/kernel/trace/fgraph.c > index ae42de909845..323a74623543 100644 > --- a/kernel/trace/fgraph.c > +++ b/kernel/trace/fgraph.c > @@ -99,10 +99,44 @@ enum { > DEFINE_STATIC_KEY_FALSE(kill_ftrace_graph); > int ftrace_graph_active; > > -static int fgraph_array_cnt; > - > static struct fgraph_ops *fgraph_array[FGRAPH_ARRAY_SIZE]; > > +/* LRU index table for fgraph_array */ > +static int fgraph_lru_table[FGRAPH_ARRAY_SIZE]; > +static int fgraph_lru_next; > +static int fgraph_lru_last; > + > +static void fgraph_lru_init(void) > +{ > + int i; > + > + for (i = 0; i < FGRAPH_ARRAY_SIZE; i++) > + fgraph_lru_table[i] = i; > +} > + > +static int fgraph_lru_release_index(int idx) > +{ > + if (idx < 0 || idx >= FGRAPH_ARRAY_SIZE || > + fgraph_lru_table[fgraph_lru_last] != -1) Can fgraph_lru_table[fgraph_lru_last] != -1 ever happen? If not, we should probably add a: WARN_ON_ONCE(fgraph_lru_table[fgraph_lru_last] != -1)) As the size of fgraph_lru_table is the same size as the available indexes, if we hit this I would think we had a fgraph_lru_relaese_index() without a fgraph_lru_alloc_index() associated with it. > + return -1; > + > + fgraph_lru_table[fgraph_lru_last] = idx; > + fgraph_lru_last = (fgraph_lru_last + 1) % FGRAPH_ARRAY_SIZE; > + return 0; > +} > + > +static int fgraph_lru_alloc_index(void) > +{ > + int idx = fgraph_lru_table[fgraph_lru_next]; > + > + if (idx == -1) > + return -1; > + > + fgraph_lru_table[fgraph_lru_next] = -1; > + fgraph_lru_next = (fgraph_lru_next + 1) % FGRAPH_ARRAY_SIZE; > + return idx; > +} > + > static inline int get_ret_stack_index(struct task_struct *t, int offset) > { > return t->ret_stack[offset] & FGRAPH_RET_INDEX_MASK; > @@ -367,7 +401,7 @@ int function_graph_enter(unsigned long ret, unsigned long func, > if (index < 0) > goto out; > > - for (i = 0; i < fgraph_array_cnt; i++) { > + for (i = 0; i < FGRAPH_ARRAY_SIZE; i++) { > struct fgraph_ops *gops = fgraph_array[i]; > > if (gops == &fgraph_stub) > @@ -935,21 +969,17 @@ int register_ftrace_graph(struct fgraph_ops *gops) > /* The array must always have real data on it */ > for (i = 0; i < FGRAPH_ARRAY_SIZE; i++) > fgraph_array[i] = &fgraph_stub; > + fgraph_lru_init(); > } > > - /* Look for an available spot */ > - for (i = 0; i < FGRAPH_ARRAY_SIZE; i++) { > - if (fgraph_array[i] == &fgraph_stub) > - break; > - } > - if (i >= FGRAPH_ARRAY_SIZE) { > + i = fgraph_lru_alloc_index(); > + if (i < 0 || > + WARN_ON_ONCE(fgraph_array[i] != &fgraph_stub)) { The above can nicely fit on one column. No need to break it up: if (i < 0 || WARN_ON_ONCE(fgraph_array[i] != &fgraph_stub)) { > ret = -EBUSY; > goto out; > } > > fgraph_array[i] = gops; > - if (i + 1 > fgraph_array_cnt) > - fgraph_array_cnt = i + 1; > gops->idx = i; > > ftrace_graph_active++; > @@ -979,25 +1009,22 @@ int register_ftrace_graph(struct fgraph_ops *gops) > void unregister_ftrace_graph(struct fgraph_ops *gops) > { > int command = 0; > - int i; > > mutex_lock(&ftrace_lock); > > if (unlikely(!ftrace_graph_active)) > goto out; > > - if (unlikely(gops->idx < 0 || gops->idx >= fgraph_array_cnt)) > + if (unlikely(gops->idx < 0 || gops->idx >= FGRAPH_ARRAY_SIZE)) > + goto out; > + > + if (WARN_ON_ONCE(fgraph_array[gops->idx] != gops)) > goto out; > > - WARN_ON_ONCE(fgraph_array[gops->idx] != gops); > + if (fgraph_lru_release_index(gops->idx) < 0) > + goto out; Removing the above WARN_ON_ONCE() is more reason to add it to the release function. -- Steve > > fgraph_array[gops->idx] = &fgraph_stub; > - if (gops->idx + 1 == fgraph_array_cnt) { > - i = gops->idx; > - while (i >= 0 && fgraph_array[i] == &fgraph_stub) > - i--; > - fgraph_array_cnt = i + 1; > - } > > ftrace_graph_active--; >
On Wed, 14 Feb 2024 13:04:09 -0500 Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote: > On Wed, 7 Feb 2024 00:10:04 +0900 > "Masami Hiramatsu (Google)" <mhiramat@kernel.org> wrote: > > > diff --git a/kernel/trace/fgraph.c b/kernel/trace/fgraph.c > > index ae42de909845..323a74623543 100644 > > --- a/kernel/trace/fgraph.c > > +++ b/kernel/trace/fgraph.c > > @@ -99,10 +99,44 @@ enum { > > DEFINE_STATIC_KEY_FALSE(kill_ftrace_graph); > > int ftrace_graph_active; > > > > -static int fgraph_array_cnt; > > - > > static struct fgraph_ops *fgraph_array[FGRAPH_ARRAY_SIZE]; > > > > +/* LRU index table for fgraph_array */ > > +static int fgraph_lru_table[FGRAPH_ARRAY_SIZE]; > > +static int fgraph_lru_next; > > +static int fgraph_lru_last; > > + > > +static void fgraph_lru_init(void) > > +{ > > + int i; > > + > > + for (i = 0; i < FGRAPH_ARRAY_SIZE; i++) > > + fgraph_lru_table[i] = i; > > +} > > + > > +static int fgraph_lru_release_index(int idx) > > +{ > > + if (idx < 0 || idx >= FGRAPH_ARRAY_SIZE || > > + fgraph_lru_table[fgraph_lru_last] != -1) > > Can fgraph_lru_table[fgraph_lru_last] != -1 ever happen? If not, we should > probably add a: > > WARN_ON_ONCE(fgraph_lru_table[fgraph_lru_last] != -1)) > > As the size of fgraph_lru_table is the same size as the available indexes, > if we hit this I would think we had a fgraph_lru_relaese_index() without a > fgraph_lru_alloc_index() associated with it. OK, let me make it warning. > > > + return -1; > > + > > + fgraph_lru_table[fgraph_lru_last] = idx; > > + fgraph_lru_last = (fgraph_lru_last + 1) % FGRAPH_ARRAY_SIZE; > > + return 0; > > +} > > + > > +static int fgraph_lru_alloc_index(void) > > +{ > > + int idx = fgraph_lru_table[fgraph_lru_next]; > > + > > + if (idx == -1) > > + return -1; > > + > > + fgraph_lru_table[fgraph_lru_next] = -1; > > + fgraph_lru_next = (fgraph_lru_next + 1) % FGRAPH_ARRAY_SIZE; > > + return idx; > > +} > > + > > static inline int get_ret_stack_index(struct task_struct *t, int offset) > > { > > return t->ret_stack[offset] & FGRAPH_RET_INDEX_MASK; > > @@ -367,7 +401,7 @@ int function_graph_enter(unsigned long ret, unsigned long func, > > if (index < 0) > > goto out; > > > > - for (i = 0; i < fgraph_array_cnt; i++) { > > + for (i = 0; i < FGRAPH_ARRAY_SIZE; i++) { > > struct fgraph_ops *gops = fgraph_array[i]; > > > > if (gops == &fgraph_stub) > > @@ -935,21 +969,17 @@ int register_ftrace_graph(struct fgraph_ops *gops) > > /* The array must always have real data on it */ > > for (i = 0; i < FGRAPH_ARRAY_SIZE; i++) > > fgraph_array[i] = &fgraph_stub; > > + fgraph_lru_init(); > > } > > > > - /* Look for an available spot */ > > - for (i = 0; i < FGRAPH_ARRAY_SIZE; i++) { > > - if (fgraph_array[i] == &fgraph_stub) > > - break; > > - } > > - if (i >= FGRAPH_ARRAY_SIZE) { > > + i = fgraph_lru_alloc_index(); > > + if (i < 0 || > > + WARN_ON_ONCE(fgraph_array[i] != &fgraph_stub)) { > > The above can nicely fit on one column. No need to break it up: > > if (i < 0 || WARN_ON_ONCE(fgraph_array[i] != &fgraph_stub)) { OK. > > > > ret = -EBUSY; > > goto out; > > } > > > > fgraph_array[i] = gops; > > - if (i + 1 > fgraph_array_cnt) > > - fgraph_array_cnt = i + 1; > > gops->idx = i; > > > > ftrace_graph_active++; > > @@ -979,25 +1009,22 @@ int register_ftrace_graph(struct fgraph_ops *gops) > > void unregister_ftrace_graph(struct fgraph_ops *gops) > > { > > int command = 0; > > - int i; > > > > mutex_lock(&ftrace_lock); > > > > if (unlikely(!ftrace_graph_active)) > > goto out; > > > > - if (unlikely(gops->idx < 0 || gops->idx >= fgraph_array_cnt)) > > + if (unlikely(gops->idx < 0 || gops->idx >= FGRAPH_ARRAY_SIZE)) > > + goto out; > > + > > + if (WARN_ON_ONCE(fgraph_array[gops->idx] != gops)) > > goto out; > > > > - WARN_ON_ONCE(fgraph_array[gops->idx] != gops); > > + if (fgraph_lru_release_index(gops->idx) < 0) > > + goto out; > > Removing the above WARN_ON_ONCE() is more reason to add it to the release > function. OK. Thank you for review! > > -- Steve > > > > > > fgraph_array[gops->idx] = &fgraph_stub; > > - if (gops->idx + 1 == fgraph_array_cnt) { > > - i = gops->idx; > > - while (i >= 0 && fgraph_array[i] == &fgraph_stub) > > - i--; > > - fgraph_array_cnt = i + 1; > > - } > > > > ftrace_graph_active--; > > >
diff --git a/kernel/trace/fgraph.c b/kernel/trace/fgraph.c index ae42de909845..323a74623543 100644 --- a/kernel/trace/fgraph.c +++ b/kernel/trace/fgraph.c @@ -99,10 +99,44 @@ enum { DEFINE_STATIC_KEY_FALSE(kill_ftrace_graph); int ftrace_graph_active; -static int fgraph_array_cnt; - static struct fgraph_ops *fgraph_array[FGRAPH_ARRAY_SIZE]; +/* LRU index table for fgraph_array */ +static int fgraph_lru_table[FGRAPH_ARRAY_SIZE]; +static int fgraph_lru_next; +static int fgraph_lru_last; + +static void fgraph_lru_init(void) +{ + int i; + + for (i = 0; i < FGRAPH_ARRAY_SIZE; i++) + fgraph_lru_table[i] = i; +} + +static int fgraph_lru_release_index(int idx) +{ + if (idx < 0 || idx >= FGRAPH_ARRAY_SIZE || + fgraph_lru_table[fgraph_lru_last] != -1) + return -1; + + fgraph_lru_table[fgraph_lru_last] = idx; + fgraph_lru_last = (fgraph_lru_last + 1) % FGRAPH_ARRAY_SIZE; + return 0; +} + +static int fgraph_lru_alloc_index(void) +{ + int idx = fgraph_lru_table[fgraph_lru_next]; + + if (idx == -1) + return -1; + + fgraph_lru_table[fgraph_lru_next] = -1; + fgraph_lru_next = (fgraph_lru_next + 1) % FGRAPH_ARRAY_SIZE; + return idx; +} + static inline int get_ret_stack_index(struct task_struct *t, int offset) { return t->ret_stack[offset] & FGRAPH_RET_INDEX_MASK; @@ -367,7 +401,7 @@ int function_graph_enter(unsigned long ret, unsigned long func, if (index < 0) goto out; - for (i = 0; i < fgraph_array_cnt; i++) { + for (i = 0; i < FGRAPH_ARRAY_SIZE; i++) { struct fgraph_ops *gops = fgraph_array[i]; if (gops == &fgraph_stub) @@ -935,21 +969,17 @@ int register_ftrace_graph(struct fgraph_ops *gops) /* The array must always have real data on it */ for (i = 0; i < FGRAPH_ARRAY_SIZE; i++) fgraph_array[i] = &fgraph_stub; + fgraph_lru_init(); } - /* Look for an available spot */ - for (i = 0; i < FGRAPH_ARRAY_SIZE; i++) { - if (fgraph_array[i] == &fgraph_stub) - break; - } - if (i >= FGRAPH_ARRAY_SIZE) { + i = fgraph_lru_alloc_index(); + if (i < 0 || + WARN_ON_ONCE(fgraph_array[i] != &fgraph_stub)) { ret = -EBUSY; goto out; } fgraph_array[i] = gops; - if (i + 1 > fgraph_array_cnt) - fgraph_array_cnt = i + 1; gops->idx = i; ftrace_graph_active++; @@ -979,25 +1009,22 @@ int register_ftrace_graph(struct fgraph_ops *gops) void unregister_ftrace_graph(struct fgraph_ops *gops) { int command = 0; - int i; mutex_lock(&ftrace_lock); if (unlikely(!ftrace_graph_active)) goto out; - if (unlikely(gops->idx < 0 || gops->idx >= fgraph_array_cnt)) + if (unlikely(gops->idx < 0 || gops->idx >= FGRAPH_ARRAY_SIZE)) + goto out; + + if (WARN_ON_ONCE(fgraph_array[gops->idx] != gops)) goto out; - WARN_ON_ONCE(fgraph_array[gops->idx] != gops); + if (fgraph_lru_release_index(gops->idx) < 0) + goto out; fgraph_array[gops->idx] = &fgraph_stub; - if (gops->idx + 1 == fgraph_array_cnt) { - i = gops->idx; - while (i >= 0 && fgraph_array[i] == &fgraph_stub) - i--; - fgraph_array_cnt = i + 1; - } ftrace_graph_active--;