patches/hwlat-detector-Update-hwlat_detector-to-add-outer-lo.patch

From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2013 17:33:25 -0400
Subject: hwlat-detector: Update hwlat_detector to add outer loop detection

The hwlat_detector reads two timestamps in a row, then reports any
gap between those calls. The problem is, it misses everything between
the second reading of the time stamp to the first reading of the time stamp
in the next loop. That's were most of the time is spent, which means,
chances are likely that it will miss all hardware latencies. This
defeats the purpose.

By also testing the first time stamp from the previous loop second
time stamp (the outer loop), we are more likely to find a latency.

Setting the threshold to 1, here's what the report now looks like:

1347415723.0232202770	0	2
1347415725.0234202822	0	2
1347415727.0236202875	0	2
1347415729.0238202928	0	2
1347415731.0240202980	0	2
1347415734.0243203061	0	2
1347415736.0245203113	0	2
1347415738.0247203166	2	0
1347415740.0249203219	0	3
1347415742.0251203272	0	3
1347415743.0252203299	0	3
1347415745.0254203351	0	2
1347415747.0256203404	0	2
1347415749.0258203457	0	2
1347415751.0260203510	0	2
1347415754.0263203589	0	2
1347415756.0265203642	0	2
1347415758.0267203695	0	2
1347415760.0269203748	0	2
1347415762.0271203801	0	2
1347415764.0273203853	2	0

There's some hardware latency that takes 2 microseconds to run.

Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt <srostedt@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
---
 drivers/misc/hwlat_detector.c |   32 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

--- a/drivers/misc/hwlat_detector.c
+++ b/drivers/misc/hwlat_detector.c
@@ -143,6 +143,7 @@ static void detector_exit(void);
 struct sample {
 	u64		seqnum;		/* unique sequence */
 	u64		duration;	/* ktime delta */
+	u64		outer_duration;	/* ktime delta (outer loop) */
 	struct timespec	timestamp;	/* wall time */
 	unsigned long   lost;
 };
@@ -219,11 +220,13 @@ static struct sample *buffer_get_sample(
  */
 static int get_sample(void *unused)
 {
-	ktime_t start, t1, t2;
+	ktime_t start, t1, t2, last_t2;
 	s64 diff, total = 0;
 	u64 sample = 0;
+	u64 outer_sample = 0;
 	int ret = 1;
 
+	last_t2.tv64 = 0;
 	start = ktime_get(); /* start timestamp */
 
 	do {
@@ -231,7 +234,22 @@ static int get_sample(void *unused)
 		t1 = ktime_get();	/* we'll look for a discontinuity */
 		t2 = ktime_get();
 
+		if (last_t2.tv64) {
+			/* Check the delta from outer loop (t2 to next t1) */
+			diff = ktime_to_us(ktime_sub(t1, last_t2));
+			/* This shouldn't happen */
+			if (diff < 0) {
+				pr_err(BANNER "time running backwards\n");
+				goto out;
+			}
+			if (diff > outer_sample)
+				outer_sample = diff;
+		}
+		last_t2 = t2;
+
 		total = ktime_to_us(ktime_sub(t2, start)); /* sample width */
+
+		/* This checks the inner loop (t1 to t2) */
 		diff = ktime_to_us(ktime_sub(t2, t1));     /* current diff */
 
 		/* This shouldn't happen */
@@ -246,12 +264,13 @@ static int get_sample(void *unused)
 	} while (total <= data.sample_width);
 
 	/* If we exceed the threshold value, we have found a hardware latency */
-	if (sample > data.threshold) {
+	if (sample > data.threshold || outer_sample > data.threshold) {
 		struct sample s;
 
 		data.count++;
 		s.seqnum = data.count;
 		s.duration = sample;
+		s.outer_duration = outer_sample;
 		s.timestamp = CURRENT_TIME;
 		__buffer_add_sample(&s);
 
@@ -738,10 +757,11 @@ static ssize_t debug_sample_fread(struct
 		}
 	}
 
-	len = snprintf(buf, sizeof(buf), "%010lu.%010lu\t%llu\n",
-		      sample->timestamp.tv_sec,
-		      sample->timestamp.tv_nsec,
-		      sample->duration);
+	len = snprintf(buf, sizeof(buf), "%010lu.%010lu\t%llu\t%llu\n",
+		       sample->timestamp.tv_sec,
+		       sample->timestamp.tv_nsec,
+		       sample->duration,
+		       sample->outer_duration);
 
 
 	/* handling partial reads is more trouble than it's worth */