[lkml]   [2006]   [Sep]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] Linux Kernel Markers
* Vara Prasad ( wrote:
> Martin Bligh wrote:
> >[...]
> >Depends what we're trying to fix. I was trying to fix two things:
> >
> >1. Flexibility - kprobes seem unable to access all local variables etc
> >easily, and go anywhere inside the function. Plus keeping low overhead
> >for doing things like keeping counters in a function (see previous
> >example I mentioned for counting pages in shrink_list).
> >
> Using tools like systemtap on can consult DWARF information and put
> probes in the middle of the function and access local variables as well,
> that is not the real problem. The issue here is compiler doesn't seem to
> generate required DWARF information in some cases due to optimizations.
> The other related problem is when there exists debug information, the
> way to specify the breakpoint location is using line number which is not
> maintainable, having a marker solves this problem as well. Your proposal
> still doesn't solve the need for markers if i understood correctly.

His implementation makes a heavy use of a marker mechanism : this is exactly
what permits to create the instrumented objects from the same source code, but
with different #defines.


OpenPGP public key:
Key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68
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: 2006-09-19 21:25    [W:0.203 / U:7.372 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site