Hi, On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 11:04 PM, <olafbuddenha...@gmx.net> wrote:
> Hi, > > On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 10:01:56PM +0100, Da Zheng wrote: > > > I logged all RPCs and tried to analyze them. (antrik, I was wrong. > > There aren't 100, 000 RPCs. The number of RPCs to the Mach during the > > subhurd booting is about 20,000 - 60,000). I found something > > abnormal, but I am not sure if it should be considered as errors. > > Yeah, while rpctracing something else, I was also surprised about the > high number of failing RPCs -- this seems to be quite common throughout > the Hurd. > > Note that such errors are not necessary bugs. As long as the error > return is handled appropriately, the code can be still perfectly > functional. > > It would be an interesting task though to investigate such failing RPCs, > and see where they come from. Some of these might indeed indicate > non-obvious bugs, that cause various kinds of problems. Also, there > might be some room for optimization: if the caller checks for certain > parameters that will obviously cause an RPC to fail up front, it would > avoid the unnecessary roundtrip... If we trace RPCs, we should trace all of them, not only the failed ones, so we might be able to do some optimization. I really doubt if it is necessary to have so many RPCs. But I wonder how you trace the source of these RPCs. >From the logging of 'boot', I can know what are the target tasks but I cannot tell where are the RPCs from, because a task can send the RPC on the behalf of another task. Zheng Da
