Messages in this thread | | | From | KOSAKI Motohiro <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] new irq tracer | Date | Fri, 27 Feb 2009 12:14:01 +0900 (JST) |
| |
> > > Given this scenario : > > > > > > A telecommunication system runs, but the client notices > > something wrong. > > > They call their service provider. The provider enables tracing > > > _remotely_ on the _production system_ while it's _active in > > the field_. > > > > > > Bam, those few milliseconds interrupt latencies become unacceptable. > > > > > > Hopefully this scenario makes the use-case clearer. The > > problem is not > > > that interrupt latencies would occur while tracing is on, > > but rather > > > that it would happen on a running production system when switching > > > tracing on. This is what is totally unacceptable for this use-case. > > > > > > For more details about such requirements, I'm CCing > > Dominique Toupin > > > from Ericsson who I'm sure would be happy to give more > > details about > > > this if needed. > > > > Hmm, so this system in the field is running Linux with the > > Real-Time Patch? Because if it isn't it will suffer from > > millisecond latencies in normal operation. > > In many cases we don't use Linux real-time, we have many systems that > are soft-real-time an non real-time Linux is good enough. >
Agreed, rt-patch seems off topics. we discuss to mainline kernel.
Steven, I sitll think nobody use ftrace on production system now yet. Do you know actual production user?
| |