Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 08:03:53PM -0400, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
>> Add kprobes-based event tracer on ftrace.
>
> Wouldn't it make more sense to call this the dynamic event tracer?
>
> The use of kprobes is more an implementation detail than something
> the user cares
Steven Rostedt wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 28 May 2009, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
>
>> +#undef SHOW_FIELD
>> +#define SHOW_FIELD(type, item, name)
>> \
>> +do {\
>> +ret = trace_seq_printf(
On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 08:03:53PM -0400, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> Add kprobes-based event tracer on ftrace.
Wouldn't it make more sense to call this the dynamic event tracer?
The use of kprobes is more an implementation detail than something
the user cares about.
--
To unsubscribe from this li
On Thu, 28 May 2009, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> +#undef SHOW_FIELD
> +#define SHOW_FIELD(type, item, name) \
> + do {\
> + ret = trace_seq_printf(s, "\tfield: " #type " %s;\t"\
> +
On Thu, 28 May 2009, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> Add kprobes-based event tracer on ftrace.
>
> This tracer is similar to the events tracer which is based on Tracepoint
> infrastructure. Instead of Tracepoint, this tracer is based on kprobes(kprobe
> and kretprobe). It probes anywhere where kprobes
Add kprobes-based event tracer on ftrace.
This tracer is similar to the events tracer which is based on Tracepoint
infrastructure. Instead of Tracepoint, this tracer is based on kprobes(kprobe
and kretprobe). It probes anywhere where kprobes can probe(this means, all
functions body except for __kp
