Eelco Chaudron <echau...@redhat.com> writes:

> This addition uses the existing syscall probes to record statistics
> related to the OVS 'Unreasonably long ... ms poll interval' message.
> Basically, it records the min/max/average time between system poll
> calls. This can be used to determine if a long poll event has
> occurred during the capture.
>
> Signed-off-by: Eelco Chaudron <echau...@redhat.com>
> ---
> The long line warning can be ignored. I'm keeping the original
> output in the documentation.
>
> v2: - Calculate the average on display, not per sample.
>     - Enhanced the documentation with additional log details.
> ---

Just some nits below, and otherwise looks good.  Thanks!

>  utilities/usdt-scripts/kernel_delay.py  | 70 ++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>  utilities/usdt-scripts/kernel_delay.rst | 17 +++++-
>  2 files changed, 83 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/utilities/usdt-scripts/kernel_delay.py 
> b/utilities/usdt-scripts/kernel_delay.py
> index 367d27e34..cbca7ef8b 100755
> --- a/utilities/usdt-scripts/kernel_delay.py
> +++ b/utilities/usdt-scripts/kernel_delay.py
> @@ -182,11 +182,27 @@ struct syscall_data_key_t {
>      u32 syscall;
>  };
>  
> +struct long_poll_data_key_t {
> +    u32 pid;
> +    u32 tid;
> +};
> +
> +struct long_poll_data_t {
> +    u64 count;
> +    u64 total_ns;
> +    u64 min_ns;
> +    u64 max_ns;
> +};
> +
>  BPF_HASH(syscall_start, u64, u64);
>  BPF_HASH(syscall_data, struct syscall_data_key_t, struct syscall_data_t);
> +BPF_HASH(long_poll_start, u64, u64);
> +BPF_HASH(long_poll_data, struct long_poll_data_key_t, struct 
> long_poll_data_t);
>  
>  TRACEPOINT_PROBE(raw_syscalls, sys_enter) {
>      u64 pid_tgid = bpf_get_current_pid_tgid();
> +    struct long_poll_data_t *val, init_val = {.min_ns = U64_MAX};
> +    struct long_poll_data_key_t key;
>  
>      if (!capture_enabled(pid_tgid))
>         return 0;
> @@ -194,6 +210,29 @@ TRACEPOINT_PROBE(raw_syscalls, sys_enter) {
>      u64 t = bpf_ktime_get_ns();
>      syscall_start.update(&pid_tgid, &t);
>  
> +    /* Do long poll handling from here on. */
> +    if (args->id != <SYSCALL_POLL_ID>)
> +        return 0;
> +
> +    u64 *start_ns = long_poll_start.lookup(&pid_tgid);
> +
> +    if (!start_ns || *start_ns == 0)
> +        return 0;
> +
> +    key.pid = pid_tgid >> 32;
> +    key.tid = (u32)pid_tgid;
> +
> +    val = long_poll_data.lookup_or_try_init(&key, &init_val);
> +    if (val) {
> +        u64 delta = t - *start_ns;
> +        val->count++;
> +        val->total_ns += delta;
> +        if (delta > val->max_ns)
> +            val->max_ns = delta;
> +        else if (delta < val->min_ns)

Should this really be an else?  It's possible that min will == U64_MAX
here so we might want to drop the 'else' and make sure it gets populated
on the first time through.

That said, I can also get behind the idea that after the first couple of
samples it won't likely matter because we'll have dropped into the 'min'
case anyway.

> +            val->min_ns = delta;
> +    }
> +
>      return 0;
>  }
>  
> @@ -206,6 +245,12 @@ TRACEPOINT_PROBE(raw_syscalls, sys_exit) {
>      if (!capture_enabled(pid_tgid))
>         return 0;
>  
> +    u64 t = bpf_ktime_get_ns();
> +
> +    if (args->id == <SYSCALL_POLL_ID>) {
> +        long_poll_start.update(&pid_tgid, &t);
> +    }
> +
>      key.pid = pid_tgid >> 32;
>      key.tid = (u32)pid_tgid;
>      key.syscall = args->id;
> @@ -217,7 +262,7 @@ TRACEPOINT_PROBE(raw_syscalls, sys_exit) {
>  
>      val = syscall_data.lookup_or_try_init(&key, &zero);
>      if (val) {
> -        u64 delta = bpf_ktime_get_ns() - *start_ns;
> +        u64 delta = t - *start_ns;
>          val->count++;
>          val->total_ns += delta;
>          if (delta > val->worst_ns)
> @@ -1039,6 +1084,9 @@ def process_results(syscall_events=None, 
> trigger_delta=None):
>      threads_syscall = {k.tid for k, _ in bpf["syscall_data"].items()
>                         if k.syscall != 0xffffffff}
>  
> +    threads_long_poll = {k.tid for k, _ in bpf["long_poll_data"].items()
> +                         if k.pid != 0xffffffff}
> +
>      threads_run = {k.tid for k, _ in bpf["run_data"].items()
>                     if k.pid != 0xffffffff}
>  
> @@ -1055,7 +1103,8 @@ def process_results(syscall_events=None, 
> trigger_delta=None):
>                         if k.pid != 0xffffffff}
>  
>      threads = sorted(threads_syscall | threads_run | threads_ready |
> -                     threads_stopped | threads_hardirq | threads_softirq,
> +                     threads_stopped | threads_hardirq | threads_softirq |
> +                     threads_long_poll,
>                       key=lambda x: get_thread_name(options.pid, x))
>  
>      #
> @@ -1099,6 +1148,21 @@ def process_results(syscall_events=None, 
> trigger_delta=None):
>              print("{}{:20.20} {:6}  {:10}  {:16,}".format(
>                  indent, "TOTAL( - poll):", "", total_count, total_ns))
>  
> +        #
> +        # LONG POLL STATISTICS
> +        #
> +        for k, v in filter(lambda t: t[0].tid == thread,
> +                           bpf["long_poll_data"].items()):
> +
> +            print("\n{:10} {:16} {}\n{}{:10}  {:>16}  {:>16}  {:>16}".format(
> +                "", "", "[LONG POLL STATISTICS]", indent,
> +                "COUNT", "AVERAGE ns", "MIN ns", "MAX ns"))
> +
> +            print("{}{:10}  {:16,}  {:16,}  {:16,}".format(
> +                indent, v.count, int(v.total_ns / v.count),
> +                v.min_ns, v.max_ns))

On the off chance that count == 0 (which should *NEVER* happen) should
we put some kind of try{}?  It's theoretical only I think, because count
should be populated as long as items() returns true... so probably not
super high priority.

> +            break
> +
>          #
>          # THREAD RUN STATISTICS
>          #
> @@ -1429,6 +1493,8 @@ def main():
>      source = source.replace("<STACK_TRACE_ENABLED>", "true"
>                              if options.stack_trace_size > 0 else "false")
>  
> +    source = source.replace("<SYSCALL_POLL_ID>", str(poll_id))
> +
>      source = source.replace("<INSTALL_OVS_DP_UPCALL_PROBE>", "0"
>                              if options.skip_upcall_stats else "1")
>  
> diff --git a/utilities/usdt-scripts/kernel_delay.rst 
> b/utilities/usdt-scripts/kernel_delay.rst
> index 41620d760..0a2a430a5 100644
> --- a/utilities/usdt-scripts/kernel_delay.rst
> +++ b/utilities/usdt-scripts/kernel_delay.rst
> @@ -67,13 +67,17 @@ with the ``--pid`` option.
>                    read                      0           1             1,292  
>            1,292
>                    TOTAL( - poll):                     519       144,405,334
>  
> +                  [LONG POLL STATISTICS]
> +                  COUNT             AVERAGE ns            MIN ns            
> MAX ns
> +                          58            76,773             7,388           
> 234,129
> +
>                    [THREAD RUN STATISTICS]
>                    SCHED_CNT           TOTAL ns            MIN ns            
> MAX ns
> -                       6       136,764,071             1,480       
> 115,146,424
> +                           6       136,764,071             1,480       
> 115,146,424
>  
>                    [THREAD READY STATISTICS]
>                    SCHED_CNT           TOTAL ns            MAX ns
> -                       7            11,334             6,636
> +                           7            11,334             6,636
>  
>                    [THREAD STOPPED STATISTICS]
>                    STOP_CNT            TOTAL ns            MAX ns
> @@ -104,6 +108,7 @@ For this, it displays the thread's id (``TID``) and name 
> (``THREAD``),
>  followed by resource-specific data. Which are:
>  
>  - ``SYSCALL STATISTICS``
> +- ``LONG POLL STATISTICS``
>  - ``THREAD RUN STATISTICS``
>  - ``THREAD READY STATISTICS``
>  - ``THREAD STOPPED STATISTICS``
> @@ -129,6 +134,14 @@ Note that it only counts calls that started and stopped 
> during the
>  measurement interval!
>  
>  
> +``LONG POLL STATISTICS``
> +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> +``LONG POLL STATISTICS`` tell you how long the thread was running between two
> +poll system calls. This relates to the 'Unreasonably long ... ms poll 
> interval'
> +message reported by ovs-vswitchd. More details about this message can be 
> found
> +in the example section.
> +
> +
>  ``THREAD RUN STATISTICS``
>  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>  ``THREAD RUN STATISTICS`` tell you how long the thread was running on a CPU

_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
d...@openvswitch.org
https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev

Reply via email to