1. Patchew
  2. linux
  3. [PATCH v5 0/8] uprobes: RCU-protected hot path optimizations
  4. View patch

[PATCH v5 8/8] uprobes: switch to RCU Tasks Trace flavor for better performance

Andrii Nakryiko posted 8 patches 1 year, 3 months ago
[PATCH v5 8/8] uprobes: switch to RCU Tasks Trace flavor for better performance
Posted by Andrii Nakryiko 1 year, 3 months ago 
This patch switches uprobes SRCU usage to RCU Tasks Trace flavor, which
is optimized for more lightweight and quick readers (at the expense of
slower writers, which for uprobes is a fine tradeof) and has better
performance and scalability with number of CPUs.

Similarly to baseline vs SRCU, we've benchmarked SRCU-based
implementation vs RCU Tasks Trace implementation.

SRCU
====
uprobe-nop      ( 1 cpus):    3.276 ± 0.005M/s  (  3.276M/s/cpu)
uprobe-nop      ( 2 cpus):    4.125 ± 0.002M/s  (  2.063M/s/cpu)
uprobe-nop      ( 4 cpus):    7.713 ± 0.002M/s  (  1.928M/s/cpu)
uprobe-nop      ( 8 cpus):    8.097 ± 0.006M/s  (  1.012M/s/cpu)
uprobe-nop      (16 cpus):    6.501 ± 0.056M/s  (  0.406M/s/cpu)
uprobe-nop      (32 cpus):    4.398 ± 0.084M/s  (  0.137M/s/cpu)
uprobe-nop      (64 cpus):    6.452 ± 0.000M/s  (  0.101M/s/cpu)

uretprobe-nop   ( 1 cpus):    2.055 ± 0.001M/s  (  2.055M/s/cpu)
uretprobe-nop   ( 2 cpus):    2.677 ± 0.000M/s  (  1.339M/s/cpu)
uretprobe-nop   ( 4 cpus):    4.561 ± 0.003M/s  (  1.140M/s/cpu)
uretprobe-nop   ( 8 cpus):    5.291 ± 0.002M/s  (  0.661M/s/cpu)
uretprobe-nop   (16 cpus):    5.065 ± 0.019M/s  (  0.317M/s/cpu)
uretprobe-nop   (32 cpus):    3.622 ± 0.003M/s  (  0.113M/s/cpu)
uretprobe-nop   (64 cpus):    3.723 ± 0.002M/s  (  0.058M/s/cpu)

RCU Tasks Trace
===============
uprobe-nop      ( 1 cpus):    3.396 ± 0.002M/s  (  3.396M/s/cpu)
uprobe-nop      ( 2 cpus):    4.271 ± 0.006M/s  (  2.135M/s/cpu)
uprobe-nop      ( 4 cpus):    8.499 ± 0.015M/s  (  2.125M/s/cpu)
uprobe-nop      ( 8 cpus):   10.355 ± 0.028M/s  (  1.294M/s/cpu)
uprobe-nop      (16 cpus):    7.615 ± 0.099M/s  (  0.476M/s/cpu)
uprobe-nop      (32 cpus):    4.430 ± 0.007M/s  (  0.138M/s/cpu)
uprobe-nop      (64 cpus):    6.887 ± 0.020M/s  (  0.108M/s/cpu)

uretprobe-nop   ( 1 cpus):    2.174 ± 0.001M/s  (  2.174M/s/cpu)
uretprobe-nop   ( 2 cpus):    2.853 ± 0.001M/s  (  1.426M/s/cpu)
uretprobe-nop   ( 4 cpus):    4.913 ± 0.002M/s  (  1.228M/s/cpu)
uretprobe-nop   ( 8 cpus):    5.883 ± 0.002M/s  (  0.735M/s/cpu)
uretprobe-nop   (16 cpus):    5.147 ± 0.001M/s  (  0.322M/s/cpu)
uretprobe-nop   (32 cpus):    3.738 ± 0.008M/s  (  0.117M/s/cpu)
uretprobe-nop   (64 cpus):    4.397 ± 0.002M/s  (  0.069M/s/cpu)

Peak throughput for uprobes increases from 8 mln/s to 10.3 mln/s
(+28%!), and for uretprobes from 5.3 mln/s to 5.8 mln/s (+11%), as we
have more work to do on uretprobes side.

Even single-thread (no contention) performance is slightly better: 3.276
mln/s to 3.396 mln/s (+3.5%) for uprobes, and 2.055 mln/s to 2.174 mln/s
(+5.8%) for uretprobes.

Reviewed-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
---
 kernel/events/uprobes.c | 38 ++++++++++++++++----------------------
 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/events/uprobes.c b/kernel/events/uprobes.c
index 8a464cf38127..1b3990dd9c93 100644
--- a/kernel/events/uprobes.c
+++ b/kernel/events/uprobes.c
@@ -26,6 +26,7 @@
 #include <linux/task_work.h>
 #include <linux/shmem_fs.h>
 #include <linux/khugepaged.h>
+#include <linux/rcupdate_trace.h>
 
 #include <linux/uprobes.h>
 
@@ -42,8 +43,6 @@ static struct rb_root uprobes_tree = RB_ROOT;
 static DEFINE_RWLOCK(uprobes_treelock);	/* serialize rbtree access */
 static seqcount_rwlock_t uprobes_seqcount = SEQCNT_RWLOCK_ZERO(uprobes_seqcount, &uprobes_treelock);
 
-DEFINE_STATIC_SRCU(uprobes_srcu);
-
 #define UPROBES_HASH_SZ	13
 /* serialize uprobe->pending_list */
 static struct mutex uprobes_mmap_mutex[UPROBES_HASH_SZ];
@@ -652,7 +651,7 @@ static void put_uprobe(struct uprobe *uprobe)
 	delayed_uprobe_remove(uprobe, NULL);
 	mutex_unlock(&delayed_uprobe_lock);
 
-	call_srcu(&uprobes_srcu, &uprobe->rcu, uprobe_free_rcu);
+	call_rcu_tasks_trace(&uprobe->rcu, uprobe_free_rcu);
 }
 
 static __always_inline
@@ -707,7 +706,7 @@ static struct uprobe *find_uprobe_rcu(struct inode *inode, loff_t offset)
 	struct rb_node *node;
 	unsigned int seq;
 
-	lockdep_assert(srcu_read_lock_held(&uprobes_srcu));
+	lockdep_assert(rcu_read_lock_trace_held());
 
 	do {
 		seq = read_seqcount_begin(&uprobes_seqcount);
@@ -935,8 +934,7 @@ static bool filter_chain(struct uprobe *uprobe, struct mm_struct *mm)
 	bool ret = false;
 
 	down_read(&uprobe->consumer_rwsem);
-	list_for_each_entry_srcu(uc, &uprobe->consumers, cons_node,
-				 srcu_read_lock_held(&uprobes_srcu)) {
+	list_for_each_entry_rcu(uc, &uprobe->consumers, cons_node, rcu_read_lock_trace_held()) {
 		ret = consumer_filter(uc, mm);
 		if (ret)
 			break;
@@ -1157,7 +1155,7 @@ void uprobe_unregister_sync(void)
 	 * unlucky enough caller can free consumer's memory and cause
 	 * handler_chain() or handle_uretprobe_chain() to do an use-after-free.
 	 */
-	synchronize_srcu(&uprobes_srcu);
+	synchronize_rcu_tasks_trace();
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(uprobe_unregister_sync);
 
@@ -1241,19 +1239,18 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(uprobe_register);
 int uprobe_apply(struct uprobe *uprobe, struct uprobe_consumer *uc, bool add)
 {
 	struct uprobe_consumer *con;
-	int ret = -ENOENT, srcu_idx;
+	int ret = -ENOENT;
 
 	down_write(&uprobe->register_rwsem);
 
-	srcu_idx = srcu_read_lock(&uprobes_srcu);
-	list_for_each_entry_srcu(con, &uprobe->consumers, cons_node,
-				 srcu_read_lock_held(&uprobes_srcu)) {
+	rcu_read_lock_trace();
+	list_for_each_entry_rcu(con, &uprobe->consumers, cons_node, rcu_read_lock_trace_held()) {
 		if (con == uc) {
 			ret = register_for_each_vma(uprobe, add ? uc : NULL);
 			break;
 		}
 	}
-	srcu_read_unlock(&uprobes_srcu, srcu_idx);
+	rcu_read_unlock_trace();
 
 	up_write(&uprobe->register_rwsem);
 
@@ -2123,8 +2120,7 @@ static void handler_chain(struct uprobe *uprobe, struct pt_regs *regs)
 
 	current->utask->auprobe = &uprobe->arch;
 
-	list_for_each_entry_srcu(uc, &uprobe->consumers, cons_node,
-				 srcu_read_lock_held(&uprobes_srcu)) {
+	list_for_each_entry_rcu(uc, &uprobe->consumers, cons_node, rcu_read_lock_trace_held()) {
 		int rc = 0;
 
 		if (uc->handler) {
@@ -2162,15 +2158,13 @@ handle_uretprobe_chain(struct return_instance *ri, struct pt_regs *regs)
 {
 	struct uprobe *uprobe = ri->uprobe;
 	struct uprobe_consumer *uc;
-	int srcu_idx;
 
-	srcu_idx = srcu_read_lock(&uprobes_srcu);
-	list_for_each_entry_srcu(uc, &uprobe->consumers, cons_node,
-				 srcu_read_lock_held(&uprobes_srcu)) {
+	rcu_read_lock_trace();
+	list_for_each_entry_rcu(uc, &uprobe->consumers, cons_node, rcu_read_lock_trace_held()) {
 		if (uc->ret_handler)
 			uc->ret_handler(uc, ri->func, regs);
 	}
-	srcu_read_unlock(&uprobes_srcu, srcu_idx);
+	rcu_read_unlock_trace();
 }
 
 static struct return_instance *find_next_ret_chain(struct return_instance *ri)
@@ -2255,13 +2249,13 @@ static void handle_swbp(struct pt_regs *regs)
 {
 	struct uprobe *uprobe;
 	unsigned long bp_vaddr;
-	int is_swbp, srcu_idx;
+	int is_swbp;
 
 	bp_vaddr = uprobe_get_swbp_addr(regs);
 	if (bp_vaddr == uprobe_get_trampoline_vaddr())
 		return uprobe_handle_trampoline(regs);
 
-	srcu_idx = srcu_read_lock(&uprobes_srcu);
+	rcu_read_lock_trace();
 
 	uprobe = find_active_uprobe_rcu(bp_vaddr, &is_swbp);
 	if (!uprobe) {
@@ -2319,7 +2313,7 @@ static void handle_swbp(struct pt_regs *regs)
 
 out:
 	/* arch_uprobe_skip_sstep() succeeded, or restart if can't singlestep */
-	srcu_read_unlock(&uprobes_srcu, srcu_idx);
+	rcu_read_unlock_trace();
 }
 
 /*
-- 
2.43.5
[tip: perf/core] uprobes: switch to RCU Tasks Trace flavor for better performance
Posted by tip-bot2 for Andrii Nakryiko 1 year, 3 months ago 
The following commit has been merged into the perf/core branch of tip:

Commit-ID:     c4d4569c41f9cda745cfd1d8089ea3d3526bafe5
Gitweb:        https://git.kernel.org/tip/c4d4569c41f9cda745cfd1d8089ea3d3526bafe5
Author:        Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
AuthorDate:    Tue, 03 Sep 2024 10:46:03 -07:00
Committer:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
CommitterDate: Thu, 05 Sep 2024 16:56:15 +02:00

uprobes: switch to RCU Tasks Trace flavor for better performance

This patch switches uprobes SRCU usage to RCU Tasks Trace flavor, which
is optimized for more lightweight and quick readers (at the expense of
slower writers, which for uprobes is a fine tradeof) and has better
performance and scalability with number of CPUs.

Similarly to baseline vs SRCU, we've benchmarked SRCU-based
implementation vs RCU Tasks Trace implementation.

SRCU
====
uprobe-nop      ( 1 cpus):    3.276 ± 0.005M/s  (  3.276M/s/cpu)
uprobe-nop      ( 2 cpus):    4.125 ± 0.002M/s  (  2.063M/s/cpu)
uprobe-nop      ( 4 cpus):    7.713 ± 0.002M/s  (  1.928M/s/cpu)
uprobe-nop      ( 8 cpus):    8.097 ± 0.006M/s  (  1.012M/s/cpu)
uprobe-nop      (16 cpus):    6.501 ± 0.056M/s  (  0.406M/s/cpu)
uprobe-nop      (32 cpus):    4.398 ± 0.084M/s  (  0.137M/s/cpu)
uprobe-nop      (64 cpus):    6.452 ± 0.000M/s  (  0.101M/s/cpu)

uretprobe-nop   ( 1 cpus):    2.055 ± 0.001M/s  (  2.055M/s/cpu)
uretprobe-nop   ( 2 cpus):    2.677 ± 0.000M/s  (  1.339M/s/cpu)
uretprobe-nop   ( 4 cpus):    4.561 ± 0.003M/s  (  1.140M/s/cpu)
uretprobe-nop   ( 8 cpus):    5.291 ± 0.002M/s  (  0.661M/s/cpu)
uretprobe-nop   (16 cpus):    5.065 ± 0.019M/s  (  0.317M/s/cpu)
uretprobe-nop   (32 cpus):    3.622 ± 0.003M/s  (  0.113M/s/cpu)
uretprobe-nop   (64 cpus):    3.723 ± 0.002M/s  (  0.058M/s/cpu)

RCU Tasks Trace
===============
uprobe-nop      ( 1 cpus):    3.396 ± 0.002M/s  (  3.396M/s/cpu)
uprobe-nop      ( 2 cpus):    4.271 ± 0.006M/s  (  2.135M/s/cpu)
uprobe-nop      ( 4 cpus):    8.499 ± 0.015M/s  (  2.125M/s/cpu)
uprobe-nop      ( 8 cpus):   10.355 ± 0.028M/s  (  1.294M/s/cpu)
uprobe-nop      (16 cpus):    7.615 ± 0.099M/s  (  0.476M/s/cpu)
uprobe-nop      (32 cpus):    4.430 ± 0.007M/s  (  0.138M/s/cpu)
uprobe-nop      (64 cpus):    6.887 ± 0.020M/s  (  0.108M/s/cpu)

uretprobe-nop   ( 1 cpus):    2.174 ± 0.001M/s  (  2.174M/s/cpu)
uretprobe-nop   ( 2 cpus):    2.853 ± 0.001M/s  (  1.426M/s/cpu)
uretprobe-nop   ( 4 cpus):    4.913 ± 0.002M/s  (  1.228M/s/cpu)
uretprobe-nop   ( 8 cpus):    5.883 ± 0.002M/s  (  0.735M/s/cpu)
uretprobe-nop   (16 cpus):    5.147 ± 0.001M/s  (  0.322M/s/cpu)
uretprobe-nop   (32 cpus):    3.738 ± 0.008M/s  (  0.117M/s/cpu)
uretprobe-nop   (64 cpus):    4.397 ± 0.002M/s  (  0.069M/s/cpu)

Peak throughput for uprobes increases from 8 mln/s to 10.3 mln/s
(+28%!), and for uretprobes from 5.3 mln/s to 5.8 mln/s (+11%), as we
have more work to do on uretprobes side.

Even single-thread (no contention) performance is slightly better: 3.276
mln/s to 3.396 mln/s (+3.5%) for uprobes, and 2.055 mln/s to 2.174 mln/s
(+5.8%) for uretprobes.

Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Reviewed-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240903174603.3554182-9-andrii@kernel.org
---
 kernel/events/uprobes.c | 38 ++++++++++++++++----------------------
 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/events/uprobes.c b/kernel/events/uprobes.c
index 4b7e590..a2e6a57 100644
--- a/kernel/events/uprobes.c
+++ b/kernel/events/uprobes.c
@@ -26,6 +26,7 @@
 #include <linux/task_work.h>
 #include <linux/shmem_fs.h>
 #include <linux/khugepaged.h>
+#include <linux/rcupdate_trace.h>
 
 #include <linux/uprobes.h>
 
@@ -42,8 +43,6 @@ static struct rb_root uprobes_tree = RB_ROOT;
 static DEFINE_RWLOCK(uprobes_treelock);	/* serialize rbtree access */
 static seqcount_rwlock_t uprobes_seqcount = SEQCNT_RWLOCK_ZERO(uprobes_seqcount, &uprobes_treelock);
 
-DEFINE_STATIC_SRCU(uprobes_srcu);
-
 #define UPROBES_HASH_SZ	13
 /* serialize uprobe->pending_list */
 static struct mutex uprobes_mmap_mutex[UPROBES_HASH_SZ];
@@ -652,7 +651,7 @@ static void put_uprobe(struct uprobe *uprobe)
 	delayed_uprobe_remove(uprobe, NULL);
 	mutex_unlock(&delayed_uprobe_lock);
 
-	call_srcu(&uprobes_srcu, &uprobe->rcu, uprobe_free_rcu);
+	call_rcu_tasks_trace(&uprobe->rcu, uprobe_free_rcu);
 }
 
 static __always_inline
@@ -707,7 +706,7 @@ static struct uprobe *find_uprobe_rcu(struct inode *inode, loff_t offset)
 	struct rb_node *node;
 	unsigned int seq;
 
-	lockdep_assert(srcu_read_lock_held(&uprobes_srcu));
+	lockdep_assert(rcu_read_lock_trace_held());
 
 	do {
 		seq = read_seqcount_begin(&uprobes_seqcount);
@@ -935,8 +934,7 @@ static bool filter_chain(struct uprobe *uprobe, struct mm_struct *mm)
 	bool ret = false;
 
 	down_read(&uprobe->consumer_rwsem);
-	list_for_each_entry_srcu(uc, &uprobe->consumers, cons_node,
-				 srcu_read_lock_held(&uprobes_srcu)) {
+	list_for_each_entry_rcu(uc, &uprobe->consumers, cons_node, rcu_read_lock_trace_held()) {
 		ret = consumer_filter(uc, mm);
 		if (ret)
 			break;
@@ -1157,7 +1155,7 @@ void uprobe_unregister_sync(void)
 	 * unlucky enough caller can free consumer's memory and cause
 	 * handler_chain() or handle_uretprobe_chain() to do an use-after-free.
 	 */
-	synchronize_srcu(&uprobes_srcu);
+	synchronize_rcu_tasks_trace();
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(uprobe_unregister_sync);
 
@@ -1241,19 +1239,18 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(uprobe_register);
 int uprobe_apply(struct uprobe *uprobe, struct uprobe_consumer *uc, bool add)
 {
 	struct uprobe_consumer *con;
-	int ret = -ENOENT, srcu_idx;
+	int ret = -ENOENT;
 
 	down_write(&uprobe->register_rwsem);
 
-	srcu_idx = srcu_read_lock(&uprobes_srcu);
-	list_for_each_entry_srcu(con, &uprobe->consumers, cons_node,
-				 srcu_read_lock_held(&uprobes_srcu)) {
+	rcu_read_lock_trace();
+	list_for_each_entry_rcu(con, &uprobe->consumers, cons_node, rcu_read_lock_trace_held()) {
 		if (con == uc) {
 			ret = register_for_each_vma(uprobe, add ? uc : NULL);
 			break;
 		}
 	}
-	srcu_read_unlock(&uprobes_srcu, srcu_idx);
+	rcu_read_unlock_trace();
 
 	up_write(&uprobe->register_rwsem);
 
@@ -2123,8 +2120,7 @@ static void handler_chain(struct uprobe *uprobe, struct pt_regs *regs)
 
 	current->utask->auprobe = &uprobe->arch;
 
-	list_for_each_entry_srcu(uc, &uprobe->consumers, cons_node,
-				 srcu_read_lock_held(&uprobes_srcu)) {
+	list_for_each_entry_rcu(uc, &uprobe->consumers, cons_node, rcu_read_lock_trace_held()) {
 		int rc = 0;
 
 		if (uc->handler) {
@@ -2162,15 +2158,13 @@ handle_uretprobe_chain(struct return_instance *ri, struct pt_regs *regs)
 {
 	struct uprobe *uprobe = ri->uprobe;
 	struct uprobe_consumer *uc;
-	int srcu_idx;
 
-	srcu_idx = srcu_read_lock(&uprobes_srcu);
-	list_for_each_entry_srcu(uc, &uprobe->consumers, cons_node,
-				 srcu_read_lock_held(&uprobes_srcu)) {
+	rcu_read_lock_trace();
+	list_for_each_entry_rcu(uc, &uprobe->consumers, cons_node, rcu_read_lock_trace_held()) {
 		if (uc->ret_handler)
 			uc->ret_handler(uc, ri->func, regs);
 	}
-	srcu_read_unlock(&uprobes_srcu, srcu_idx);
+	rcu_read_unlock_trace();
 }
 
 static struct return_instance *find_next_ret_chain(struct return_instance *ri)
@@ -2255,13 +2249,13 @@ static void handle_swbp(struct pt_regs *regs)
 {
 	struct uprobe *uprobe;
 	unsigned long bp_vaddr;
-	int is_swbp, srcu_idx;
+	int is_swbp;
 
 	bp_vaddr = uprobe_get_swbp_addr(regs);
 	if (bp_vaddr == uprobe_get_trampoline_vaddr())
 		return uprobe_handle_trampoline(regs);
 
-	srcu_idx = srcu_read_lock(&uprobes_srcu);
+	rcu_read_lock_trace();
 
 	uprobe = find_active_uprobe_rcu(bp_vaddr, &is_swbp);
 	if (!uprobe) {
@@ -2319,7 +2313,7 @@ static void handle_swbp(struct pt_regs *regs)
 
 out:
 	/* arch_uprobe_skip_sstep() succeeded, or restart if can't singlestep */
-	srcu_read_unlock(&uprobes_srcu, srcu_idx);
+	rcu_read_unlock_trace();
 }
 
 /*
Re: [tip: perf/core] uprobes: switch to RCU Tasks Trace flavor for better performance
Posted by Andrii Nakryiko 1 year, 3 months ago 
On Thu, Sep 5, 2024 at 8:03 AM tip-bot2 for Andrii Nakryiko
<tip-bot2@linutronix.de> wrote:
>
> The following commit has been merged into the perf/core branch of tip:
>
> Commit-ID:     c4d4569c41f9cda745cfd1d8089ea3d3526bafe5
> Gitweb:        https://git.kernel.org/tip/c4d4569c41f9cda745cfd1d8089ea3d3526bafe5
> Author:        Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
> AuthorDate:    Tue, 03 Sep 2024 10:46:03 -07:00
> Committer:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
> CommitterDate: Thu, 05 Sep 2024 16:56:15 +02:00
>

Hm... This commit landed in perf/core, but is gone now (the rest of
patches is still there). Any idea what happened?

> uprobes: switch to RCU Tasks Trace flavor for better performance
>
> This patch switches uprobes SRCU usage to RCU Tasks Trace flavor, which
> is optimized for more lightweight and quick readers (at the expense of
> slower writers, which for uprobes is a fine tradeof) and has better
> performance and scalability with number of CPUs.
>
> Similarly to baseline vs SRCU, we've benchmarked SRCU-based
> implementation vs RCU Tasks Trace implementation.
>

[...]
Re: [tip: perf/core] uprobes: switch to RCU Tasks Trace flavor for better performance
Posted by Ingo Molnar 1 year, 3 months ago 
* Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Sep 5, 2024 at 8:03 AM tip-bot2 for Andrii Nakryiko
> <tip-bot2@linutronix.de> wrote:
> >
> > The following commit has been merged into the perf/core branch of tip:
> >
> > Commit-ID:     c4d4569c41f9cda745cfd1d8089ea3d3526bafe5
> > Gitweb:        https://git.kernel.org/tip/c4d4569c41f9cda745cfd1d8089ea3d3526bafe5
> > Author:        Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
> > AuthorDate:    Tue, 03 Sep 2024 10:46:03 -07:00
> > Committer:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
> > CommitterDate: Thu, 05 Sep 2024 16:56:15 +02:00
> >
> 
> Hm... This commit landed in perf/core, but is gone now (the rest of
> patches is still there). Any idea what happened?

Yeah, I'm getting this build failure:

     kernel/events/uprobes.c:1158:9: error: implicit declaration of function ‘synchronize_rcu_tasks_trace’; did you mean ‘synchronize_rcu_tasks’? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]

on x86-64 defconfig, when applied to today's perf/core.

Thanks,

	Ingo
Re: [tip: perf/core] uprobes: switch to RCU Tasks Trace flavor for better performance
Posted by Andrii Nakryiko 1 year, 3 months ago 
On Tue, Sep 10, 2024 at 3:37 AM Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> wrote:
>
>
> * Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Sep 5, 2024 at 8:03 AM tip-bot2 for Andrii Nakryiko
> > <tip-bot2@linutronix.de> wrote:
> > >
> > > The following commit has been merged into the perf/core branch of tip:
> > >
> > > Commit-ID:     c4d4569c41f9cda745cfd1d8089ea3d3526bafe5
> > > Gitweb:        https://git.kernel.org/tip/c4d4569c41f9cda745cfd1d8089ea3d3526bafe5
> > > Author:        Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
> > > AuthorDate:    Tue, 03 Sep 2024 10:46:03 -07:00
> > > Committer:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
> > > CommitterDate: Thu, 05 Sep 2024 16:56:15 +02:00
> > >
> >
> > Hm... This commit landed in perf/core, but is gone now (the rest of
> > patches is still there). Any idea what happened?
>
> Yeah, I'm getting this build failure:
>
>      kernel/events/uprobes.c:1158:9: error: implicit declaration of function ‘synchronize_rcu_tasks_trace’; did you mean ‘synchronize_rcu_tasks’? [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
>
> on x86-64 defconfig, when applied to today's perf/core.
>

I see, I need to add `select TASKS_TRACE_RCU` to UPROBES kconfig, I'll
fix it up and send this patch separately.

Next time please let me know ASAP about issues with my patches so I
can fix stuff like this quickly.

> Thanks,
>
>         Ingo
Re: [tip: perf/core] uprobes: switch to RCU Tasks Trace flavor for better performance
Posted by Peter Zijlstra 1 year, 3 months ago 
On Sun, Sep 08, 2024 at 06:11:04PM -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 5, 2024 at 8:03 AM tip-bot2 for Andrii Nakryiko
> <tip-bot2@linutronix.de> wrote:
> >
> > The following commit has been merged into the perf/core branch of tip:
> >
> > Commit-ID:     c4d4569c41f9cda745cfd1d8089ea3d3526bafe5
> > Gitweb:        https://git.kernel.org/tip/c4d4569c41f9cda745cfd1d8089ea3d3526bafe5
> > Author:        Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
> > AuthorDate:    Tue, 03 Sep 2024 10:46:03 -07:00
> > Committer:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
> > CommitterDate: Thu, 05 Sep 2024 16:56:15 +02:00
> >
> 
> Hm... This commit landed in perf/core, but is gone now (the rest of
> patches is still there). Any idea what happened?

IIRC Ingo popped it because he was seeing build failures with it. Ingo,
I thought you would share the build fail so Andrii could deal with it?

Patchew 2.1-devel-b67e4c2

© 2016 - 2025 Red Hat, Inc.