On Sat, 2 Dec 2023 18:45:07 -0500 Steven Rostedt <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sat, 2 Dec 2023 14:24:26 -0800 > "Paul E. McKenney" <[email protected]> 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) <[email protected]> -- Steve
