lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [May]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] Changed blk trace msgs to directly use relay buffer
Jens Axboe wrote:
> On Tue, May 27 2008, Alan D. Brunelle wrote:
>
>> From 43c8ea2b78f31d7ccd349384a9a2084e787aafc1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>> From: Alan D. Brunelle <alan.brunelle@hp.com>
>> Date: Tue, 27 May 2008 10:32:36 -0400
>> Subject: [PATCH] Changed blk trace msgs to directly use relay buffer
>>
>> Allows for SMP-usage without corruption, and removes an extra copy at
>> the expense of copying extra bytes. Reduced message size from 1024 to 128.
>
> Or, alternatively, something like the below. Then we don't
> unconditionally reserve and copy 128 bytes for each message, at the
> cost 128 bytes per-cpu per trace.

I looked into something like this, but thought the added complexity
wasn't worth it. Besides the extra per-cpu stuff, you also have an extra
memcopy involved - in my patch you print directly into the relay buffer.
I figure that /if/ copying (128-msg_size) extra bytes is too much, one
could always shrink the 128 down further. [I would think 64 bytes is
probably ok.]

I'd bet that the reduced complexity, and skipping the extra memcopy more
than offsets having to copy a few extra bytes...

Alan


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-05-28 14:55    [W:0.036 / U:0.152 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site