From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124])
	by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A7F4A04B2;
	Mon,  4 May 2020 19:08:33 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E88A31D168;
	Mon,  4 May 2020 19:08:32 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from us-smtp-1.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com
 [205.139.110.120]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7CEA1D160
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon,  4 May 2020 19:08:31 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com;
 s=mimecast20190719; t=1588612111;
 h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id:
 to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type:
 content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding:
 in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references;
 bh=Om/mryV9B+T2XPZ4aje9r+/bNHlWH+ImdoPrbGxrMFM=;
 b=dnge6U4wh0YKObBJtV11mT+VXzilyC47ZVTOlDAyf+9moJqfiSHG5yJcKYkLRK5V0B9lq/
 b36BPCLu93wl/fowCbbgV49KdKOzrBhjRIqyVZUv8dg6zy8UpixQpp9+undfyftSuulUcl
 kd2bSQ3dQUkc3p/dzKNoxVpoz6PRe1Q=
Received: from mail-vs1-f72.google.com (mail-vs1-f72.google.com
 [209.85.217.72]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id
 us-mta-330-0WhaMp8YOEaOgZbM71z0qw-1; Mon, 04 May 2020 13:08:29 -0400
X-MC-Unique: 0WhaMp8YOEaOgZbM71z0qw-1
Received: by mail-vs1-f72.google.com with SMTP id v1so45331vsi.17
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon, 04 May 2020 10:08:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
 h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date
 :message-id:subject:to:cc;
 bh=Zn5FI+i84S87L3XGTI9xniPtR/IOjs4eJ6o4hEsVQw4=;
 b=cWnmpHGzZmc4pNPXSvHNGaVuftgb9+AAvMUMorCTf9ACq/atoL797rADdMctdNzHXg
 MJphSJevvAR9posioDJjKmv/SZakhCBFeh8ooj+bzFjea7TWBVKtQ10lpgkAoZvpiSKr
 x6cDlWEMuzSiY1PfmgQCeYEzPoUcu6L+W7ZTTWi3DZyCEQTNpkXVEQ58WyrjmLhquAl1
 OZkxyCPlB9N9+2VjmK6jdQL/i3yXQgVGlTGdUIH4SRMpAQQZQsf5JNEmAzGU+ZjvIXnP
 BULBWlne6YZM4NeDBk4zHZnRBKu3TstfOhyVh+hxdmETVwT9FYl8rC2zfXQzAgs6otCp
 y2dQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0Pub+vXzcUbLI41rFhIKedweFxw6XDoQig0BMnH32uWy/hBWI2kcA
 xh23H92hgwCwEcBMNQ0KjSipW4Cjqo4M6z7OJafcaDQeG1UO6ZlNtKwjUDODckEiWn6eMJIIsZp
 HZjmMN3Xql3FpF/OOGfk=
X-Received: by 2002:ab0:5ad1:: with SMTP id x17mr12489213uae.126.1588612108982; 
 Mon, 04 May 2020 10:08:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypIiFhlYCP9Ed2bv6mdsc5G2ZwKG4ObIL1YnOy8EQSToop7PwdLaAv/zp+Lcmz5mVRe7FBLXwVc0qp//hUPnWlo=
X-Received: by 2002:ab0:5ad1:: with SMTP id x17mr12489179uae.126.1588612108647; 
 Mon, 04 May 2020 10:08:28 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20200503203135.6493-1-david.marchand@redhat.com>
 <20200503203135.6493-3-david.marchand@redhat.com>
 <CALBAE1MuJYw6jWc+TB503UiotZ62x6DdRruo-UrMS8RkOx8hQw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJFAV8y9HUdjGBPm8Zd+hDoNaCknP_jUhtg8V1pH-9QZ1fL4Vw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALBAE1O0fA8261QMkdN=6A5v354edcsayj8nofZQ4we_Xo0Z1w@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALBAE1O0fA8261QMkdN=6A5v354edcsayj8nofZQ4we_Xo0Z1w@mail.gmail.com>
From: David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 4 May 2020 19:08:17 +0200
Message-ID: <CAJFAV8yaoPyQjCUHEbHKvHQ6G5DYGptpNE0xBC4wGcEJnDnbAg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jerin Jacob <jerinjacobk@gmail.com>
Cc: dpdk-dev <dev@dpdk.org>, Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>,
 Jerin Jacob <jerinj@marvell.com>, 
 Sunil Kumar Kori <skori@marvell.com>, John McNamara <john.mcnamara@intel.com>, 
 Marko Kovacevic <marko.kovacevic@intel.com>,
 Declan Doherty <declan.doherty@intel.com>, 
 Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>,
 Andrew Rybchenko <arybchenko@solarflare.com>, 
 Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0
X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/8] trace: simplify trace point registration
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 4:39 PM Jerin Jacob <jerinjacobk@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 7:34 PM David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>=
 wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 4:47 AM Jerin Jacob <jerinjacobk@gmail.com> wrot=
e:
> > >
> > > On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 2:02 AM David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.=
com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > RTE_TRACE_POINT_DEFINE and RTE_TRACE_POINT_REGISTER must come in pa=
irs.
> > > > Merge them and let RTE_TRACE_POINT_REGISTER handle the constructor =
part.
> > >
> > >
> > > Initially, I thought of doing the same. But, later I realized that
> > > this largely grows the number of constructors been called.
> > > I had concerns about the boot time of the application and/or loading
> > > the shared library, that the reason why spitting
> > > as two so that constructor registers a burst of traces like rte_log.
> >
> > I am a bit skeptical.
> > In terms of cycles and looking at __rte_trace_point_register() (which
> > calls malloc), the cost of calling multiple constructors instead of
> > one is negligible.
>
> We will have a lot tracepoints latter, each one translates to the
> constructor may not be a good
> improvement. The scope is limited only to register function so IMO it
> is okay to have split
> just like rte_log. I don't see any reason why it has to be a different
> than rte_log.

What is similar to rte_log?
There is neither RTE_LOG_REGISTER macro, nor two-steps declaration of
dynamic logtypes.


>
> One of the thought process is, we probably remove the constructor
> scheme to all other with DPDK
> and replace it with a more register scheme. In such a case, we can
> skip calling the constructor all tother
> when trace is disabled.

Sorry, but I have a hard time understanding your point.
Are you talking about application boot time?


--=20
David Marchand