On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 08:26:05PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 12 November 2014 19:24, Frederic Weisbecker <fweis...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I'd rather leave that to tracepoints. Like trace_hrtimer_spurious(). > > Yeah, it was just to prove things right on the console without getting > into traces. > > > Or better yet: have trace_hrtimer_interrupt() which we can compare against > > trace_hrtimer_expire_entry/exit() to check if any hrtimer callback have run > > in the interrupt. This way we avoid workarounds like the above count. > > Yeah, I also believe we better add this debug information to mainline kernel. > I will try to get a patch for that soon. > > Would it be recommended to add both trace points? > i.e. trace_hrtimer_interrupt() and trace_hrtimer_spurious()
I don't think you need to add anything. We already have tracepoints for every single interrupt (and therefore also for the hrtimer one) and we have expiry tracepoints. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
