[lkml]   [2008]   [Sep]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Unified tracing buffer
* Peter Zijlstra ( wrote:
> On Sat, 2008-09-20 at 05:03 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > Oh, and all commands should start with the namespace.
> >
> > ring_buffer_alloc()
> > ring_buffer_free()
> > ring_buffer_record_event()
> I really think we should separate the ringbuffer management from the
> event stuff.

Sure, I am strongly in favor of separating those two, given they
represent two different things. However, the requirement I have heard at
KS2008 was to provide

- Unified buffering mechanism
- Timestamps synchronized across all buffers
- Unified event IDs management, so events from various sources could be
shared between tools.
- As of my understanding, unified event structure, which can be exported
to userspace and be shared across different tools.
- Unified buffer control/management mechanism.

These all represent different infrastructure parts, but are all needed
if we want tools to be able to share the data exported through those

Relay is a good example of having only a _single_ of these layers in
common : there is currently no way the different relay users can share
the data they collect because they have simply no idea how others
structure their data.


Mathieu Desnoyers
OpenPGP key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68

 \ /
  Last update: 2008-09-23 04:39    [W:0.227 / U:7.676 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site