On Sat, 2 Dec 2023 18:45:07 -0500
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Sat, 2 Dec 2023 14:24:26 -0800
> "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > > Note, the unlikely tracing is running on my production server v6.6.3.
> > >
> > > The above trace is from my test box with latest Linus's tree.
> >
> > Nice tool!!!
>
> Thanks! It's only been in the kernel since 2008 ;-)
>
> 1f0d69a9fc815 ("tracing: profile likely and unlikely annotations")
>
> >
> > My kneejerk reaction is that that condition is suboptimal. Does the
> > (untested) patch below help things?
>
> I'll give it a try on Monday.
>
This looks to have caused a difference. Although there's other RCU
functions that need dealing with, but that's for when I have time to
analyze all the places that have bad annotations.
Anyway:
correct incorrect % Function File Line
------- --------- - -------- ---- ----
[..]
17924 0 0 rcu_softirq_qs tree.c 247
Tested-by: Steven Rostedt (Google) <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx>
-- Steve
