lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Jun]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH] sched: Fix sched_wakeup tracepoint
From
Date
On Fri, 2015-06-05 at 13:23 +0000, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> OK, so considering the definition naming feedback you provided, we
> may need a 3 tracepoint if we want to calculate both wakeup latency
> and scheduling latency (naming ofc open to discussion):
>
> sched_wakeup: when try_to_wake_up{,_local} is called in the waker.
> sched_activate_task: when the wakee is marked runnable.
> sched_switch: when scheduling actually happens.

I would propose:

sched_waking: upon calling try_to_wake_up() as soon as we know we need
to change state; guaranteed to be called from the context doing the
wakeup.

sched_woken: the wakeup is complete (task is runnable, any delay
between this and actually getting on a cpu is down to the scheduler).

sched_switch: when switching from task @prev to @next.

This means abandoning trace_sched_wakeup(); which might be a problem,
which is why I bloody hate tracepoints :-(

> We can then calculate wakeup latency as
>
> time@sched_activate - time@sched_wakeup
>
> And scheduling latency as
>
> time@sched_switch - time@sched_activate
>
> In the case of critical path analysis, we don't care about this
> level of granularity. What we care about is is sum of the two,
> which we can express as:
>
> time@sched_switch - time@sched_wakeup
>
> Is there an officially blessed name for this ?

No idea.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-06-06 14:21    [W:0.094 / U:2.256 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site