From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <systemtap-return-14306-listarch-systemtap=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 18663 invoked by alias); 17 Nov 2009 06:03:02 -0000
Received: (qmail 18648 invoked by uid 22791); 17 Nov 2009 06:03:00 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0 	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from mx3.mail.elte.hu (HELO mx3.mail.elte.hu) (157.181.1.138)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 17 Nov 2009 06:01:56 +0000
Received: from elvis.elte.hu ([157.181.1.14]) 	by mx3.mail.elte.hu with esmtp (Exim) 	id 1NAH89-0007vw-Mi 	from <mingo@elte.hu>; Tue, 17 Nov 2009 07:01:39 +0100
Received: by elvis.elte.hu (Postfix, from userid 1004) 	id 35AFF3E22E5; Tue, 17 Nov 2009 07:01:32 +0100 (CET)
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 06:03:00 -0000
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@redhat.com>
Cc: Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com>, lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, 	systemtap <systemtap@sources.redhat.com>, 	DLE <dle-develop@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -tip 3/3] Add get_signal tracepoint
Message-ID: <20091117060130.GB30852@elte.hu>
References: <20091113225226.15079.90813.stgit@harusame>  <20091113225240.15079.4863.stgit@harusame>  <20091113235333.0E3CC15E8@magilla.sf.frob.com>  <20091114001020.GB24738@elte.hu>  <4B01C95B.1070302@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4B01C95B.1070302@redhat.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-08-17)
Received-SPF: neutral (mx3: 157.181.1.14 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of elte.hu) client-ip=157.181.1.14; envelope-from=mingo@elte.hu; helo=elvis.elte.hu;
X-ELTE-SpamScore: 0.0
X-ELTE-SpamLevel:
X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no
X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0
X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=0.0 required=5.9 tests=none autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.5 	_SUMMARY_
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact systemtap-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <systemtap.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:systemtap-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Post: <mailto:systemtap@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:systemtap-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/lists.html#faqs>
Sender: systemtap-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2009-q4/txt/msg00547.txt.bz2


* Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@redhat.com> wrote:

> >  - signal IPI/wakeup events
> 
> All signals might be used for IPI, isn't it? :-)

I mean, to analyze the various dynamic delivery details of how a signal 
send affects a target task:

 1) which task/PID was selected to be woken

 2) if the task got woken (from sleep) due to the signal sending

 3) if it was already woken, whether it needed an IPI via kick_process()

What proportion of signals were wakeups and what proportion hit an 
already running task is a relevant question to ask when analyzing the 
performance characteristics of signals.

	Ingo