lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Jan]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 19/20 -v5] Trace irq disabled critical timings
    Hi -

    On Wed, Jan 23, 2008 at 06:58:23PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
    > [...]
    > > Is there an opportunity here to share effort with latencytop, and
    > > ideally to use markers as much as possible for these event hooks?
    >
    > I'm still thinking latencytop should only record stack traces and do the
    > rest in user-space.
    >
    > Also, the things the latency tracer and latecytop measure are quite
    > different. the latency tracer measures how long a non-schedulable
    > section is, latencytop measures how a task was scheduled away.

    The commonality I imagine is not in what sorts of reports they create,
    or where they complete the formatting for and end-user. It is solely
    whether the kernel-side instrumentation sites can be represented by
    individual markers, so that these particular tools as well as future
    ones don't need to keep inserting custom code in similar or even the
    same places.

    - FChE


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2008-01-23 19:47    [W:0.024 / U:0.240 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site