lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Mar]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 4/6] trace: trace syscall in its handler not from ptrace handler

* Vaibhav Nagarnaik <vnagarnaik@google.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 7:43 PM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> wrote:
> > But instead you add a penalty for every syscall, even if tracing is
> > disabled.  Not cool.
>
> I just ran a small test binary which calls syscall(SYS_getuid) in a
> tight loop and calculates the latency per syscall.
>
> Without my patch: it is 70 ns/call
> With my patch: it is 83 ns/call
>
> So yes, it does add a bit of latency to the syscall even if
> tracing is disabled. I wonder if I can change the redirection
> function so that it doesn't add so much latency.

There's a really simple rule for anything tracing/debugging
related: and syscalls don't add *ANY* kind of latency to the
non-tracing case. That is true of the current syscall tracing
bits, they work via a TIF flag and don't add any latency.

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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-03-29 08:23    [W:0.084 / U:0.024 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site