Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 17 Nov 2010 13:53:46 +0100 | From | Frederic Weisbecker <> | Subject | Re: [ANNOUNCE] New utility: 'trace' |
| |
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 12:35:50PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Wed, 2010-11-17 at 09:30 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > For example I'm currently working with dozens of trace_printk() and I would be > > > very happy to turn some of them off half of the time. > > > > I guess we could try such a patch. If you send a prototype i'd be interested in > > testing it out. > > I don't see the point, the kernel shouldn't contain any trace_printk()s > to begin with..
It's oriented toward developers. Those who use dozens of tracepoints in their tree because they are debugging something or developing a new feature, they might to deactivate/reactivate some of these independant points.
This can also apply to dynamic_printk of course.
Well, the very first and main point is to standardize trace_printk into a trace event so that it gets usable by perf tools. I have been asked many times "how to use trace_printk() with perf?".
| |