Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 22 Sep 2008 13:13:28 -0700 | From | "Martin Bligh" <> | Subject | Re: Unified tracing buffer |
| |
> I agree to integrate tracing buffer mechanism, but I don't think > your proposal is the simplest one. > > To simplify, I think the layered buffering mechanism is desirable. > - The lowest layer just provides named circular buffers(both per-cpu and > uni-buffer in system) and read/write scheme. > - Next layer provides user/kernel interface including controls. > - Top layer defines packet(and event) formatting utilities. > - Additionally, it would better provide some library routines(timestamp, > event-id synchronize, and so on). > > Since this unified buffer is used from different kind of tracers/loggers, > I don't think all of them(and future tracers) want to be tied down by > "event-id"+"parameter" format. > So, Sorry, I disagree about that the tracing buffer defines its *data format*, > it's just overkill for me.
I think you're right that we can layer this, and we didn't make a particularly good job of splitting those things out. I'll try to pull together another revision to reflect this and other suggested changes.
One thing that I think is still important is to have a unified timestamp mechanism on everything, so we can co-ordinate different things back together in userspace from different trace tools, so I intend to keep that at a lower level, but I think you're right that the event id, etc can move up into separate layers.
| |