Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2013 13:26:20 +0400 From: Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@FreeBSD.org> To: Pawel Jakub Dawidek <pjd@FreeBSD.org> Cc: arch@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: [CFR][CFT] counter(9): new API for faster and raceless counters Message-ID: <20130403092620.GT76816@glebius.int.ru> In-Reply-To: <20130402232606.GC1810@garage.freebsd.pl> References: <20130401115128.GZ76816@FreeBSD.org> <20130402232606.GC1810@garage.freebsd.pl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Pawel,
On Wed, Apr 03, 2013 at 01:26:07AM +0200, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
P> > Together with Konstantin Belousov (kib@) we developed a new API that is
P> > initially purposed for (but not limited to) collecting statistical
P> > data in kernel.
P>
P> Is there any plan to implement universal way of exporting those
P> statistics out of the kernel?
P>
P> Solaris has a framework for in-kernel statistics, which are exported via
P> kstat tool. For ZFS I export them via sysctl. If you have ZFS loaded you
P> can try 'sysctl kstat'.
There are already primitives for sysctl in the branch:
#include <sys/sysctl.h>
SYSCTL_COUNTER_U64(parent, nbr, name, access, ptr, val, descr);
SYSCTL_ADD_COUNTER_U64(ctx, parent, nbr, name, access, ptr, descr);
I do not think that every counter(9) in system should create an oid
automatically. We are going to have counters per ipfw and per pf rule.
P> It would be nice for counter_u64_alloc() to take additional argument
P> 'name' and to create sysctl for the counter automatically. We could then
P> slowly start migrating userland tools to use sysctls (or some wrapper
P> userland API), but we immediately make those statistics available for
P> use in scripts.
Oh, in this bikeshed I am somewhere between your plan and the XML junta :)
I'd better stay away from this discussion :) Let's keep topic on the new
primitive.
Just keep in mind that having a name would require another memory
allocation, from normal not per-cpu malloc(9).
P> > o Tiny API for counter(9):
P> >
P> > counter_u64_t
P> > counter_u64_alloc(int wait);
P> >
P> > void
P> > counter_u64_free(counter_u64_t cnt);
P> >
P> > void
P> > counter_u64_add(counter_u64_t cnt, uint64_t inc);
P> >
P> > uint64_t
P> > counter_u64_fetch(counter_u64_t cnt);
P>
P> Do you really expect other types in the future? If so, could we at least
P> create generic counter_t that internally keeps the type?
We will probably have signed 64-bit, actually allocated from the same
zone.
A type keeping type would require either additional allocation from malloc(9)
or UMA directly, that would store the type, or we will store type in every
per-cpu copy, wasting memory.
--
Totus tuus, Glebius.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20130403092620.GT76816>