lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Nov]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [RFC perf,bpf 5/5] perf util: generate bpf_prog_info_event for short living bpf programs
Date
On 11/6/18 3:17 PM, Song Liu wrote:
>
>
>> On Nov 6, 2018, at 1:54 PM, David Ahern <dsahern@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 11/6/18 1:52 PM, Song Liu wrote:
>>> +
>>> static int record__mmap_read_all(struct record *rec)
>>> {
>>> int err;
>>>
>>> + err = record__mmap_process_vip_events(rec);
>>> + if (err)
>>> + return err;
>>> +
>>> err = record__mmap_read_evlist(rec, rec->evlist, false);
>>> if (err)
>>> return err;
>>
>> Seems to me that is going to increase the overhead of perf on any system
>> doing BPF updates. The BPF events cause a wakeup every load and unload,
>> and perf processes not only the VIP events but then walks all of the
>> other maps.
>
> BPF prog load/unload events should be rare events in real world use cases.
> So I think the overhead is OK. Also, I don't see an easy way to improve
> this.
>
>>
>>> @@ -1686,6 +1734,8 @@ static struct option __record_options[] = {
>>> "signal"),
>>> OPT_BOOLEAN(0, "dry-run", &dry_run,
>>> "Parse options then exit"),
>>> + OPT_BOOLEAN(0, "no-bpf-event", &record.no_bpf_event,
>>> + "do not record event on bpf program load/unload"),
>>
>> Why should this default on? If am recording FIB events, I don't care
>> about BPF events.
>>
>
> I am OK with default off if that's the preferred way.

I think concerns with perf overhead from collecting bpf events
are unfounded.
I would prefer for this flag to be on by default.
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-11-07 00:30    [W:0.050 / U:19.000 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site