Re: [patch 0/1] extending low-level markers

2007-08-07 Thread Frank Ch. Eigler
Noah Watkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > [...] > The locks are aquired and released in each _start and _end marker, so > the equilibrium is not a issue. But it becomes an issue should preemption, or control flow upset such as an early return or recursion, occurs between the start and end marker

Re: [patch 0/1] extending low-level markers

2007-08-02 Thread Noah Watkins
> > > > > > > The locking is internal to our framework and done on a per-type basis. > > The start/end example i mentioned could represent an interval. When the > > two points are wired up they both have their private data pointing at a > > kmalloc'd interval structure internal to our framework,

Re: [patch 0/1] extending low-level markers

2007-08-02 Thread Mathieu Desnoyers
* Noah Watkins ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > Hrm, what is wrong with : > > > > trace_mark(ds_myevent, "%d %zu %p", arg1, arg2, arg3); > > > > then ? > > > > You could then attach your probe to all markers staring with a ds_ > > prefix. (we should keep a list of the used prefixes somewhere) You

Re: [patch 0/1] extending low-level markers

2007-08-02 Thread Noah Watkins
> Hrm, what is wrong with : > > trace_mark(ds_myevent, "%d %zu %p", arg1, arg2, arg3); > > then ? > > You could then attach your probe to all markers staring with a ds_ > prefix. (we should keep a list of the used prefixes somewhere) You could > match with format strings to figure out which call

Re: [patch 0/1] extending low-level markers

2007-08-02 Thread Mathieu Desnoyers
* Noah Watkins ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > On 02/08/07 12:44 -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote: > > * [EMAIL PROTECTED] ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > > Mathieu > > > > > > I have been working with your Kernel Markers infrastructure now for some > > > time and have run into an extendability issue. >

Re: [patch 0/1] extending low-level markers

2007-08-02 Thread Noah Watkins
On 02/08/07 12:44 -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote: > * [EMAIL PROTECTED] ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > Mathieu > > > > I have been working with your Kernel Markers infrastructure now for some > > time and have run into an extendability issue. > > Hi Noah, > > Can you tell us a little bit more ab

Re: [patch 0/1] extending low-level markers

2007-08-02 Thread Mathieu Desnoyers
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > Mathieu > > I have been working with your Kernel Markers infrastructure now for some > time and have run into an extendability issue. Hi Noah, Can you tell us a little bit more about what you are doing with the markers ? I guess it could be useful