[lkml]   [2004]   [Aug]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
On Monday, August 23, 2004 9:27 am, wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 23, 2004 at 02:02:42AM -0700, David Mosberger wrote:
> > You do realize that q-syscollect [1] can do this better for you
> > without touching the kernel at all?
> > [1]
> Never heard of it. Unfortunately, the issue I run into far more
> frequently than tools not existing is users being unwilling or unable
> to use them. In fact, it's even a relatively large hassle to get users
> to boot with /proc/profile enabled regardless of its simplicity. For an
> issue this common I would prefer that the most basic tools available
> (i.e. the very few that are near-universal, e.g. readprofile(1) etc.)
> report callers to spinlock contention by default.

q-tools is great and I'd really like to use it, but it would be great if
readprofile worked too and reported callers into the contention function.
I've already found that q-tools isn't that easy to setup on some machines,
whereas readprofile is near universal, so I think there's value in making the
latter work reasonably well, while still keeping its simplicity.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:05    [W:0.048 / U:1.612 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site