[lkml]   [2009]   [Feb]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] new irq tracer
    Hi -

    On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 11:10:35PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
    > > > I really am having a difficult time seeing the use in such narrow
    > > > tracers.
    > >
    > > Part of the problem may come from defining "tracers" as something
    > > limited to ftrace engines. Once such tracepoints are in the kernel,
    > > more powerful analytical tools may be attached to them.
    > ftrace graph tracer is by far the most powerful thing I've seen [...]

    Be that as it may, what you suggested required separate correlation of
    data with /proc/interrupts contents.

    > What is limiting are these puny little tracers that have no real value.

    Which limited resource would even puny tracers exhaust?

    > A much better purpose for these tracepoints would be augmenting data in
    > existing tracers like the graph/function/sched tracer.

    Be more specific. How would you augment those tracers with e.g.
    individual irq numbers, their disposition status (HANDLED etc.).

    - FChE

     \ /
      Last update: 2009-02-18 23:27    [W:0.078 / U:7.576 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site