Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

[Profiler] CPU profiler: Check if the stackwalk lock was not already taken #6198

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Nov 12, 2024
Merged

[Profiler] CPU profiler: Check if the stackwalk lock was not already taken #6198

merged 6 commits into from
Nov 12, 2024

Conversation

gleocadie
Copy link
Collaborator

@gleocadie gleocadie commented Oct 24, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Summary of changes

Check if the stack walk lock was not taken before unwinding in the timer_create-based CPU profiler.

Reason for change

We got situation where a signal-based profiler (Walltime/CPU) interrupted a non-signal-based profiler (ex: Exception, Allocation, Contention...) while unwinding the callstack. This situation leads to a crash.

Implementation details

  • Implement a SpinningMutex: This class is simple based on its current usage. If it needs to be used elsewhere we need to review/improve it.
  • Check if the stack walk lock is not already taken. If it the cases, bail out (for now)

Test coverage

Added new tests.

Other details

Another PR is in progress to have metrics around discarded samples due to those checks.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the area:profiler Issues related to the continous-profiler label Oct 24, 2024
@gleocadie gleocadie changed the title [Profiler] CPU profiler: Add safety checks before unwiding [Profiler] CPU profiler: Add safety checks before unwinding Oct 24, 2024
@andrewlock
Copy link
Member

andrewlock commented Oct 24, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Execution-Time Benchmarks Report ⏱️

Execution-time results for samples comparing the following branches/commits:

Execution-time benchmarks measure the whole time it takes to execute a program. And are intended to measure the one-off costs. Cases where the execution time results for the PR are worse than latest master results are shown in red. The following thresholds were used for comparing the execution times:

  • Welch test with statistical test for significance of 5%
  • Only results indicating a difference greater than 5% and 5 ms are considered.

Note that these results are based on a single point-in-time result for each branch. For full results, see the dashboard.

Graphs show the p99 interval based on the mean and StdDev of the test run, as well as the mean value of the run (shown as a diamond below the graph).

gantt
    title Execution time (ms) FakeDbCommand (.NET Framework 4.6.2) 
    dateFormat  X
    axisFormat %s
    todayMarker off
    section Baseline
    This PR (6198) - mean (70ms)  : 66, 74
     .   : milestone, 70,
    master - mean (70ms)  : 68, 71
     .   : milestone, 70,

    section CallTarget+Inlining+NGEN
    This PR (6198) - mean (1,114ms)  : 1095, 1133
     .   : milestone, 1114,
    master - mean (1,116ms)  : 1099, 1133
     .   : milestone, 1116,
Loading 
gantt
    title Execution time (ms) FakeDbCommand (.NET Core 3.1) 
    dateFormat  X
    axisFormat %s
    todayMarker off
    section Baseline
    This PR (6198) - mean (108ms)  : 105, 111
     .   : milestone, 108,
    master - mean (108ms)  : 106, 110
     .   : milestone, 108,

    section CallTarget+Inlining+NGEN
    This PR (6198) - mean (778ms)  : 765, 791
     .   : milestone, 778,
    master - mean (775ms)  : 762, 787
     .   : milestone, 775,
Loading 
gantt
    title Execution time (ms) FakeDbCommand (.NET 6) 
    dateFormat  X
    axisFormat %s
    todayMarker off
    section Baseline
    This PR (6198) - mean (92ms)  : 90, 94
     .   : milestone, 92,
    master - mean (91ms)  : 90, 93
     .   : milestone, 91,

    section CallTarget+Inlining+NGEN
    This PR (6198) - mean (733ms)  : 719, 747
     .   : milestone, 733,
    master - mean (731ms)  : 716, 746
     .   : milestone, 731,
Loading 
gantt
    title Execution time (ms) HttpMessageHandler (.NET Framework 4.6.2) 
    dateFormat  X
    axisFormat %s
    todayMarker off
    section Baseline
    This PR (6198) - mean (190ms)  : 187, 192
     .   : milestone, 190,
    master - mean (191ms)  : 185, 196
     .   : milestone, 191,

    section CallTarget+Inlining+NGEN
    This PR (6198) - mean (1,228ms)  : 1203, 1253
     .   : milestone, 1228,
    master - mean (1,229ms)  : 1208, 1250
     .   : milestone, 1229,
Loading 
gantt
    title Execution time (ms) HttpMessageHandler (.NET Core 3.1) 
    dateFormat  X
    axisFormat %s
    todayMarker off
    section Baseline
    This PR (6198) - mean (275ms)  : 271, 280
     .   : milestone, 275,
    master - mean (275ms)  : 270, 280
     .   : milestone, 275,

    section CallTarget+Inlining+NGEN
    This PR (6198) - mean (957ms)  : 939, 974
     .   : milestone, 957,
    master - mean (949ms)  : 934, 964
     .   : milestone, 949,
Loading 
gantt
    title Execution time (ms) HttpMessageHandler (.NET 6) 
    dateFormat  X
    axisFormat %s
    todayMarker off
    section Baseline
    This PR (6198) - mean (264ms)  : 260, 267
     .   : milestone, 264,
    master - mean (264ms)  : 260, 268
     .   : milestone, 264,

    section CallTarget+Inlining+NGEN
    This PR (6198) - mean (934ms)  : 915, 953
     .   : milestone, 934,
    master - mean (935ms)  : 913, 957
     .   : milestone, 935,
Loading

@datadog-ddstaging
Copy link

datadog-ddstaging bot commented Oct 24, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Datadog Report

Branch report: gleocadie/add-checks-before-unwinding-for-cpu-profiler
Commit report: aaae6ad
Test service: dd-trace-dotnet

❌ 1 Failed (1 Known Flaky), 371274 Passed, 2410 Skipped, 16h 35m 8.75s Total Time

❌ Failed Tests (1)

  • ShouldGetAllocationSamplesViaEtw - Datadog.Profiler.IntegrationTests.Allocations.AllocationsProfilerTest - ❄️ Known flaky - Details

    Expand for error 
     
 Actual:   Falseilure

@andrewlock
Copy link
Member

andrewlock commented Oct 24, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Benchmarks Report for tracer 🐌

Benchmarks for #6198 compared to master:

  • 2 benchmarks are faster, with geometric mean 1.179
  • 1 benchmarks have more allocations

The following thresholds were used for comparing the benchmark speeds:

  • Mann–Whitney U test with statistical test for significance of 5%
  • Only results indicating a difference greater than 10% and 0.3 ns are considered.

Allocation changes below 0.5% are ignored.

Benchmark details

Benchmarks.Trace.ActivityBenchmark - Same speed ✔️ Same allocations ✔️

Raw results

Branch Method Toolchain Mean StdError StdDev Gen 0 Gen 1 Gen 2 Allocated
master StartStopWithChild net6.0 8.06μs 45.4ns 318ns 0.0203 0.00814 0 5.61 KB
master StartStopWithChild netcoreapp3.1 10.2μs 56.7ns 372ns 0.0193 0.00963 0 5.81 KB
master StartStopWithChild net472 16.5μs 80ns 320ns 1.05 0.312 0.107 6.22 KB
#6198 StartStopWithChild net6.0 7.94μs 44.7ns 303ns 0.0193 0.00772 0 5.61 KB
#6198 StartStopWithChild netcoreapp3.1 10.2μs 55ns 306ns 0.01 0.005 0 5.8 KB
#6198 StartStopWithChild net472 16.3μs 44.8ns 173ns 1.05 0.319 0.0981 6.2 KB
Benchmarks.Trace.AgentWriterBenchmark - Same speed ✔️ Same allocations ✔️

Raw results

Branch Method Toolchain Mean StdError StdDev Gen 0 Gen 1 Gen 2 Allocated
master WriteAndFlushEnrichedTraces net6.0 488μs 234ns 876ns 0 0 0 2.7 KB
master WriteAndFlushEnrichedTraces netcoreapp3.1 634μs 295ns 1.06μs 0 0 0 2.7 KB
master WriteAndFlushEnrichedTraces net472 843μs 784ns 3.04μs 0.422 0 0 3.3 KB
#6198 WriteAndFlushEnrichedTraces net6.0 489μs 506ns 1.96μs 0 0 0 2.7 KB
#6198 WriteAndFlushEnrichedTraces netcoreapp3.1 627μs 339ns 1.27μs 0 0 0 2.7 KB
#6198 WriteAndFlushEnrichedTraces net472 846μs 507ns 1.96μs 0.419 0 0 3.3 KB
Benchmarks.Trace.AspNetCoreBenchmark - Same speed ✔️ Same allocations ✔️

Raw results

Branch Method Toolchain Mean StdError StdDev Gen 0 Gen 1 Gen 2 Allocated
master SendRequest net6.0 200μs 1.11μs 8.3μs 0.188 0 0 18.73 KB
master SendRequest netcoreapp3.1 220μs 1.24μs 8.01μs 0.207 0 0 20.89 KB
master SendRequest net472 0ns 0ns 0ns 0 0 0 0 b
#6198 SendRequest net6.0 197μs 1.11μs 7.39μs 0.188 0 0 18.73 KB
#6198 SendRequest netcoreapp3.1 217μs 1.15μs 6.32μs 0.207 0 0 20.89 KB
#6198 SendRequest net472 0.000273ns 0.000159ns 0.000574ns 0 0 0 0 b
Benchmarks.Trace.CIVisibilityProtocolWriterBenchmark - Same speed ✔️ More allocations ⚠️

More allocations ⚠️ in #6198

Benchmark Base Allocated Diff Allocated Change Change %
Benchmarks.Trace.CIVisibilityProtocolWriterBenchmark.WriteAndFlushEnrichedTraces‑net6.0 41.47 KB 41.74 KB 269 B 0.65%

Raw results

Branch Method Toolchain Mean StdError StdDev Gen 0 Gen 1 Gen 2 Allocated
master WriteAndFlushEnrichedTraces net6.0 560μs 3.03μs 16μs 0.561 0 0 41.47 KB
master WriteAndFlushEnrichedTraces netcoreapp3.1 698μs 3.9μs 24μs 0.334 0 0 41.77 KB
master WriteAndFlushEnrichedTraces net472 864μs 3.06μs 11.9μs 8.33 2.5 0.417 53.33 KB
#6198 WriteAndFlushEnrichedTraces net6.0 565μs 2.88μs 12.9μs 0.548 0 0 41.74 KB
#6198 WriteAndFlushEnrichedTraces netcoreapp3.1 702μs 3.74μs 20.5μs 0.338 0 0 41.65 KB
#6198 WriteAndFlushEnrichedTraces net472 853μs 3.34μs 12.9μs 8.08 2.55 0.425 53.27 KB
Benchmarks.Trace.DbCommandBenchmark - Same speed ✔️ Same allocations ✔️

Raw results

Branch Method Toolchain Mean StdError StdDev Gen 0 Gen 1 Gen 2 Allocated
master ExecuteNonQuery net6.0 1.33μs 0.978ns 3.66ns 0.0146 0 0 1.02 KB
master ExecuteNonQuery netcoreapp3.1 1.79μs 1.56ns 6.04ns 0.014 0 0 1.02 KB
master ExecuteNonQuery net472 2.17μs 1.26ns 4.73ns 0.156 0.0011 0 987 B
#6198 ExecuteNonQuery net6.0 1.23μs 1.03ns 3.87ns 0.0142 0 0 1.02 KB
#6198 ExecuteNonQuery netcoreapp3.1 1.73μs 1.34ns 5.19ns 0.0139 0 0 1.02 KB
#6198 ExecuteNonQuery net472 2.05μs 2.35ns 8.81ns 0.156 0.00103 0 987 B
Benchmarks.Trace.ElasticsearchBenchmark - Same speed ✔️ Same allocations ✔️

Raw results

Branch Method Toolchain Mean StdError StdDev Gen 0 Gen 1 Gen 2 Allocated
master CallElasticsearch net6.0 1.26μs 0.819ns 3.17ns 0.0139 0 0 976 B
master CallElasticsearch netcoreapp3.1 1.55μs 0.657ns 2.55ns 0.0125 0 0 976 B
master CallElasticsearch net472 2.44μs 1.37ns 5.12ns 0.157 0 0 995 B
master CallElasticsearchAsync net6.0 1.36μs 0.645ns 2.5ns 0.0128 0 0 952 B
master CallElasticsearchAsync netcoreapp3.1 1.63μs 0.758ns 2.73ns 0.0139 0 0 1.02 KB
master CallElasticsearchAsync net472 2.68μs 1.5ns 5.81ns 0.166 0 0 1.05 KB
#6198 CallElasticsearch net6.0 1.23μs 2.1ns 8.13ns 0.0135 0 0 976 B
#6198 CallElasticsearch netcoreapp3.1 1.52μs 0.689ns 2.67ns 0.0129 0 0 976 B
#6198 CallElasticsearch net472 2.6μs 2.14ns 8.3ns 0.157 0 0 995 B
#6198 CallElasticsearchAsync net6.0 1.25μs 0.545ns 2.11ns 0.0131 0 0 952 B
#6198 CallElasticsearchAsync netcoreapp3.1 1.62μs 2.76ns 10.3ns 0.0138 0 0 1.02 KB
#6198 CallElasticsearchAsync net472 2.68μs 1.25ns 4.84ns 0.166 0 0 1.05 KB
Benchmarks.Trace.GraphQLBenchmark - Faster 🎉 Same allocations ✔️

Faster 🎉 in #6198

Benchmark base/diff Base Median (ns) Diff Median (ns) Modality
Benchmarks.Trace.GraphQLBenchmark.ExecuteAsync‑net6.0 1.142 1,364.71 1,195.35

Raw results

Branch Method Toolchain Mean StdError StdDev Gen 0 Gen 1 Gen 2 Allocated
master ExecuteAsync net6.0 1.36μs 0.87ns 3.26ns 0.0131 0 0 952 B
master ExecuteAsync netcoreapp3.1 1.67μs 0.923ns 3.45ns 0.0133 0 0 952 B
master ExecuteAsync net472 1.85μs 1.08ns 4.03ns 0.145 0 0 915 B
#6198 ExecuteAsync net6.0 1.2μs 0.957ns 3.58ns 0.0134 0 0 952 B
#6198 ExecuteAsync netcoreapp3.1 1.56μs 0.449ns 1.62ns 0.0125 0 0 952 B
#6198 ExecuteAsync net472 1.89μs 0.574ns 2.07ns 0.145 0 0 915 B
Benchmarks.Trace.HttpClientBenchmark - Same speed ✔️ Same allocations ✔️

Raw results

Branch Method Toolchain Mean StdError StdDev Gen 0 Gen 1 Gen 2 Allocated
master SendAsync net6.0 4.42μs 2.82ns 10.9ns 0.033 0 0 2.31 KB
master SendAsync netcoreapp3.1 5.42μs 2.45ns 9.18ns 0.0379 0 0 2.85 KB
master SendAsync net472 7.46μs 5.19ns 20.1ns 0.493 0 0 3.12 KB
#6198 SendAsync net6.0 4.51μs 1.38ns 5.34ns 0.0314 0 0 2.31 KB
#6198 SendAsync netcoreapp3.1 5.31μs 2.67ns 9.64ns 0.0372 0 0 2.85 KB
#6198 SendAsync net472 7.5μs 2.41ns 9.02ns 0.495 0 0 3.12 KB
Benchmarks.Trace.ILoggerBenchmark - Same speed ✔️ Same allocations ✔️

Raw results

Branch Method Toolchain Mean StdError StdDev Gen 0 Gen 1 Gen 2 Allocated
master EnrichedLog net6.0 1.46μs 0.671ns 2.51ns 0.0233 0 0 1.64 KB
master EnrichedLog netcoreapp3.1 2.17μs 0.663ns 2.39ns 0.0227 0 0 1.64 KB
master EnrichedLog net472 2.69μs 1.6ns 6.21ns 0.249 0 0 1.57 KB
#6198 EnrichedLog net6.0 1.46μs 0.716ns 2.77ns 0.0229 0 0 1.64 KB
#6198 EnrichedLog netcoreapp3.1 2.23μs 1.16ns 4.48ns 0.0223 0 0 1.64 KB
#6198 EnrichedLog net472 2.58μs 1.49ns 5.56ns 0.249 0 0 1.57 KB
Benchmarks.Trace.Log4netBenchmark - Same speed ✔️ Same allocations ✔️

Raw results

Branch Method Toolchain Mean StdError StdDev Gen 0 Gen 1 Gen 2 Allocated
master EnrichedLog net6.0 119μs 237ns 917ns 0.0594 0 0 4.28 KB
master EnrichedLog netcoreapp3.1 123μs 335ns 1.3μs 0 0 0 4.28 KB
master EnrichedLog net472 154μs 150ns 581ns 0.691 0.23 0 4.46 KB
#6198 EnrichedLog net6.0 117μs 116ns 449ns 0 0 0 4.28 KB
#6198 EnrichedLog netcoreapp3.1 120μs 69.8ns 242ns 0.0596 0 0 4.28 KB
#6198 EnrichedLog net472 152μs 104ns 403ns 0.682 0.227 0 4.46 KB
Benchmarks.Trace.NLogBenchmark - Same speed ✔️ Same allocations ✔️

Raw results

Branch Method Toolchain Mean StdError StdDev Gen 0 Gen 1 Gen 2 Allocated
master EnrichedLog net6.0 3.04μs 0.741ns 2.77ns 0.0305 0 0 2.2 KB
master EnrichedLog netcoreapp3.1 4.05μs 2.19ns 7.88ns 0.0287 0 0 2.2 KB
master EnrichedLog net472 4.82μs 1.67ns 6.26ns 0.32 0 0 2.02 KB
#6198 EnrichedLog net6.0 2.91μs 0.808ns 3.13ns 0.0305 0 0 2.2 KB
#6198 EnrichedLog netcoreapp3.1 4.12μs 1.79ns 6.91ns 0.029 0 0 2.2 KB
#6198 EnrichedLog net472 4.67μs 2ns 7.73ns 0.319 0 0 2.02 KB
Benchmarks.Trace.RedisBenchmark - Same speed ✔️ Same allocations ✔️

Raw results

Branch Method Toolchain Mean StdError StdDev Gen 0 Gen 1 Gen 2 Allocated
master SendReceive net6.0 1.28μs 1.23ns 4.78ns 0.0161 0 0 1.14 KB
master SendReceive netcoreapp3.1 1.85μs 0.78ns 3.02ns 0.0157 0 0 1.14 KB
master SendReceive net472 2.13μs 2.09ns 7.22ns 0.184 0 0 1.16 KB
#6198 SendReceive net6.0 1.34μs 0.652ns 2.53ns 0.0161 0 0 1.14 KB
#6198 SendReceive netcoreapp3.1 1.69μs 1.75ns 6.79ns 0.0153 0 0 1.14 KB
#6198 SendReceive net472 2.09μs 0.699ns 2.52ns 0.183 0 0 1.16 KB
Benchmarks.Trace.SerilogBenchmark - Same speed ✔️ Same allocations ✔️

Raw results

Branch Method Toolchain Mean StdError StdDev Gen 0 Gen 1 Gen 2 Allocated
master EnrichedLog net6.0 2.67μs 0.987ns 3.69ns 0.0227 0 0 1.6 KB
master EnrichedLog netcoreapp3.1 3.68μs 2.71ns 10.5ns 0.0221 0 0 1.65 KB
master EnrichedLog net472 4.35μs 1.81ns 6.78ns 0.322 0 0 2.04 KB
#6198 EnrichedLog net6.0 2.87μs 0.76ns 2.84ns 0.023 0 0 1.6 KB
#6198 EnrichedLog netcoreapp3.1 4.04μs 2.9ns 11.2ns 0.0223 0 0 1.65 KB
#6198 EnrichedLog net472 4.59μs 2.65ns 10.2ns 0.323 0 0 2.04 KB
Benchmarks.Trace.SpanBenchmark - Faster 🎉 Same allocations ✔️

Faster 🎉 in #6198

Benchmark base/diff Base Median (ns) Diff Median (ns) Modality
Benchmarks.Trace.SpanBenchmark.StartFinishSpan‑netcoreapp3.1 1.218 668.85 549.30

Raw results

Branch Method Toolchain Mean StdError StdDev Gen 0 Gen 1 Gen 2 Allocated
master StartFinishSpan net6.0 403ns 0.158ns 0.592ns 0.0081 0 0 576 B
master StartFinishSpan netcoreapp3.1 664ns 2.96ns 11.5ns 0.00776 0 0 576 B
master StartFinishSpan net472 718ns 0.792ns 3.07ns 0.0917 0 0 578 B
master StartFinishScope net6.0 475ns 0.58ns 2.25ns 0.00968 0 0 696 B
master StartFinishScope netcoreapp3.1 790ns 0.64ns 2.48ns 0.00911 0 0 696 B
master StartFinishScope net472 902ns 0.888ns 3.44ns 0.104 0 0 658 B
#6198 StartFinishSpan net6.0 399ns 0.362ns 1.35ns 0.00802 0 0 576 B
#6198 StartFinishSpan netcoreapp3.1 549ns 0.325ns 1.22ns 0.00769 0 0 576 B
#6198 StartFinishSpan net472 755ns 0.794ns 3.07ns 0.0917 0 0 578 B
#6198 StartFinishScope net6.0 480ns 0.34ns 1.32ns 0.00982 0 0 696 B
#6198 StartFinishScope netcoreapp3.1 766ns 0.884ns 3.42ns 0.00961 0 0 696 B
#6198 StartFinishScope net472 854ns 0.569ns 2.2ns 0.104 0 0 658 B
Benchmarks.Trace.TraceAnnotationsBenchmark - Same speed ✔️ Same allocations ✔️

Raw results

Branch Method Toolchain Mean StdError StdDev Gen 0 Gen 1 Gen 2 Allocated
master RunOnMethodBegin net6.0 667ns 0.484ns 1.87ns 0.00964 0 0 696 B
master RunOnMethodBegin netcoreapp3.1 933ns 3.18ns 12.3ns 0.0095 0 0 696 B
master RunOnMethodBegin net472 1.15μs 0.798ns 3.09ns 0.104 0 0 658 B
#6198 RunOnMethodBegin net6.0 643ns 0.68ns 2.63ns 0.00969 0 0 696 B
#6198 RunOnMethodBegin netcoreapp3.1 928ns 0.924ns 3.58ns 0.00936 0 0 696 B
#6198 RunOnMethodBegin net472 1.14μs 1.1ns 4.25ns 0.104 0 0 658 B

@andrewlock
Copy link
Member

andrewlock commented Oct 24, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Throughput/Crank Report ⚡

Throughput results for AspNetCoreSimpleController comparing the following branches/commits:

Cases where throughput results for the PR are worse than latest master (5% drop or greater), results are shown in red.

Note that these results are based on a single point-in-time result for each branch. For full results, see one of the many, many dashboards!

gantt
    title Throughput Linux x64 (Total requests) 
    dateFormat  X
    axisFormat %s
    section Baseline
    This PR (6198) (11.241M)   : 0, 11241441
    master (11.132M)   : 0, 11131684
    benchmarks/2.9.0 (11.033M)   : 0, 11032866

    section Automatic
    This PR (6198) (7.261M)   : 0, 7260875
    master (7.202M)   : 0, 7202253
    benchmarks/2.9.0 (7.786M)   : 0, 7785853

    section Trace stats
    master (7.442M)   : 0, 7442024

    section Manual
    master (10.983M)   : 0, 10982660

    section Manual + Automatic
    This PR (6198) (6.725M)   : 0, 6724811
    master (6.645M)   : 0, 6644995

    section DD_TRACE_ENABLED=0
    master (10.234M)   : 0, 10233674
Loading 
gantt
    title Throughput Linux arm64 (Total requests) 
    dateFormat  X
    axisFormat %s
    section Baseline
    This PR (6198) (9.670M)   : 0, 9670015
    master (9.505M)   : 0, 9505311
    benchmarks/2.9.0 (9.495M)   : 0, 9494821

    section Automatic
    This PR (6198) (6.224M)   : 0, 6223645
    master (6.463M)   : 0, 6462996

    section Trace stats
    master (6.709M)   : 0, 6709463

    section Manual
    master (9.346M)   : 0, 9345687

    section Manual + Automatic
    This PR (6198) (5.986M)   : 0, 5985857
    master (5.903M)   : 0, 5902776

    section DD_TRACE_ENABLED=0
    master (8.956M)   : 0, 8956040
Loading 
gantt
    title Throughput Windows x64 (Total requests) 
    dateFormat  X
    axisFormat %s
    section Baseline
    This PR (6198) (9.658M)   : 0, 9657924
    master (9.708M)   : 0, 9708001
    benchmarks/2.9.0 (10.020M)   : 0, 10019592

    section Automatic
    This PR (6198) (6.159M)   : 0, 6158726
    master (6.407M)   : 0, 6407146
    benchmarks/2.9.0 (7.255M)   : 0, 7255257

    section Trace stats
    master (7.103M)   : 0, 7102656

    section Manual
    master (9.685M)   : 0, 9685116

    section Manual + Automatic
    This PR (6198) (5.782M)   : 0, 5782289
    master (6.028M)   : 0, 6027641

    section DD_TRACE_ENABLED=0
    master (9.212M)   : 0, 9211970
Loading

@gleocadie gleocadie marked this pull request as ready for review October 25, 2024 07:38
@gleocadie gleocadie requested a review from a team as a code owner October 25, 2024 07:38
@gleocadie gleocadie force-pushed the gleocadie/add-checks-before-unwinding-for-cpu-profiler branch from 6de1063 to f798d41 Compare October 25, 2024 17:20
chrisnas
chrisnas approved these changes Oct 28, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@chrisnas chrisnas left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

profiler/src/ProfilerEngine/Datadog.Profiler.Native.Linux/TimerCreateCpuProfiler.cpp Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@gleocadie gleocadie force-pushed the gleocadie/add-checks-before-unwinding-for-cpu-profiler branch 12 times, most recently from 1b7f238 to 4948785 Compare November 4, 2024 09:02
@gleocadie gleocadie marked this pull request as draft November 4, 2024 09:03
@gleocadie gleocadie changed the title [Profiler] CPU profiler: Add safety checks before unwinding [Profiler] CPU profiler: Check if the stackwalk lock was not already taken Nov 4, 2024
@gleocadie gleocadie force-pushed the gleocadie/add-checks-before-unwinding-for-cpu-profiler branch 2 times, most recently from b083800 to 9ccc080 Compare November 4, 2024 15:11
@gleocadie gleocadie marked this pull request as ready for review November 4, 2024 15:19
chrisnas
chrisnas approved these changes Nov 6, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@chrisnas chrisnas left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@gleocadie gleocadie force-pushed the gleocadie/add-checks-before-unwinding-for-cpu-profiler branch from a0b2d17 to 94b53ae Compare November 6, 2024 11:04
@gleocadie gleocadie force-pushed the gleocadie/add-checks-before-unwinding-for-cpu-profiler branch from 94b53ae to 4c09216 Compare November 11, 2024 12:40
@gleocadie gleocadie force-pushed the gleocadie/add-checks-before-unwinding-for-cpu-profiler branch from 4c09216 to aaae6ad Compare November 12, 2024 08:41
@gleocadie gleocadie merged commit e0a0928 into master Nov 12, 2024
82 of 85 checks passed
@gleocadie gleocadie deleted the gleocadie/add-checks-before-unwinding-for-cpu-profiler branch November 12, 2024 10:36
@github-actions github-actions bot added this to the vNext-v3 milestone Nov 12, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@chrisnas chrisnas chrisnas approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
area:profiler Issues related to the continous-profiler
Projects
None yet
Milestone
vNext-v3
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
3 participants
@gleocadie @andrewlock @chrisnas