On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 01:27:20PM -0400, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
> Hi -
>
> > [...] How about creating trace_tick() in
> > include/trace/events/timer.h and call it from tick_periodic() and
> > tick_sched_handle(). [...]
>
> Like this?
>
>
> From facee64445c0dcc717e99c474c5c7dcdd31b9a74 Mon
Hi -
> [...] How about creating trace_tick() in
> include/trace/events/timer.h and call it from tick_periodic() and
> tick_sched_handle(). [...]
Like this?
>From facee64445c0dcc717e99c474c5c7dcdd31b9a74 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: "Frank Ch. Eigler"
Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2013 10:35:21 -0400
Hi -
[...] How about creating trace_tick() in
include/trace/events/timer.h and call it from tick_periodic() and
tick_sched_handle(). [...]
Like this?
From facee64445c0dcc717e99c474c5c7dcdd31b9a74 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Frank Ch. Eigler f...@redhat.com
Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2013 10:35:21
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 10:46:55AM -0400, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
> Hi, Frederic -
>
>
> > > How about this?
> > >
> > > Author: Frank Ch. Eigler
> > > Date: Wed Apr 3 10:35:21 2013 -0400
> > >
> > > profiling: add profile_tick tracepoint
> > > [...]
>
> > It would be better not to tie
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 10:46:55AM -0400, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
Hi, Frederic -
How about this?
Author: Frank Ch. Eigler f...@redhat.com
Date: Wed Apr 3 10:35:21 2013 -0400
profiling: add profile_tick tracepoint
[...]
It would be better not to tie this to
Hi, Frederic -
> > How about this?
> >
> > Author: Frank Ch. Eigler
> > Date: Wed Apr 3 10:35:21 2013 -0400
> >
> > profiling: add profile_tick tracepoint
> > [...]
> It would be better not to tie this to CONFIG_PROFILING.
> A tracepoint in update_process_times() instead would be great
Hi, Frederic -
How about this?
Author: Frank Ch. Eigler f...@redhat.com
Date: Wed Apr 3 10:35:21 2013 -0400
profiling: add profile_tick tracepoint
[...]
It would be better not to tie this to CONFIG_PROFILING.
A tracepoint in update_process_times() instead would be great
* Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
> Hi -
>
> On Wed, Apr 03, 2013 at 02:49:53PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
>
> > Sounds good, would you like to propose a version? We are also
> > interested in a timer tick event tracepoint for dynticks debugging.
>
> How about this?
>
> Author: Frank Ch.
* Frank Ch. Eigler f...@redhat.com wrote:
Hi -
On Wed, Apr 03, 2013 at 02:49:53PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
Sounds good, would you like to propose a version? We are also
interested in a timer tick event tracepoint for dynticks debugging.
How about this?
Author: Frank Ch.
2013/4/3 Frank Ch. Eigler :
> Hi -
>
> On Wed, Apr 03, 2013 at 02:49:53PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
>
>> Sounds good, would you like to propose a version? We are also
>> interested in a timer tick event tracepoint for dynticks debugging.
>
> How about this?
>
> Author: Frank Ch. Eigler
>
2013/4/3 Frank Ch. Eigler f...@redhat.com:
Hi -
On Wed, Apr 03, 2013 at 02:49:53PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
Sounds good, would you like to propose a version? We are also
interested in a timer tick event tracepoint for dynticks debugging.
How about this?
Author: Frank Ch. Eigler
On 04/03/2013 07:44 AM, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
> Hi -
>
> On Wed, Apr 03, 2013 at 02:49:53PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
>
>> Sounds good, would you like to propose a version? We are also
>> interested in a timer tick event tracepoint for dynticks debugging.
>
> How about this?
>
>
Hi -
On Wed, Apr 03, 2013 at 02:49:53PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> Sounds good, would you like to propose a version? We are also
> interested in a timer tick event tracepoint for dynticks debugging.
How about this?
Author: Frank Ch. Eigler
Date: Wed Apr 3 10:35:21 2013 -0400
2013/4/3 Frank Ch. Eigler :
> Frederic Weisbecker writes:
>
>> [...]
>> Sometimes I don't mind keeping around code in the kernel for out of
>> tree users, depending on the case. But in this specific matter we have
>> more standard ways to do this kind of hook: kprobes, static
>> tracepoints. A
Frederic Weisbecker writes:
> [...]
> Sometimes I don't mind keeping around code in the kernel for out of
> tree users, depending on the case. But in this specific matter we have
> more standard ways to do this kind of hook: kprobes, static
> tracepoints. A tracepoint on the timer tick would be
2013/4/3 Mel Gorman :
> Commit ba6fdda4 (profiling: Remove unused timer hook) removed
> [un]register_timer_hook due to a lack of upstream users and a belief
> that there were no out-of-tree users. However, systemtap uses it and
> with that patch applied, some stap scripts fail with
>
> WARNING:
Commit ba6fdda4 (profiling: Remove unused timer hook) removed
[un]register_timer_hook due to a lack of upstream users and a belief
that there were no out-of-tree users. However, systemtap uses it and
with that patch applied, some stap scripts fail with
WARNING: "unregister_timer_hook"
Commit ba6fdda4 (profiling: Remove unused timer hook) removed
[un]register_timer_hook due to a lack of upstream users and a belief
that there were no out-of-tree users. However, systemtap uses it and
with that patch applied, some stap scripts fail with
WARNING: unregister_timer_hook
2013/4/3 Mel Gorman mgor...@suse.de:
Commit ba6fdda4 (profiling: Remove unused timer hook) removed
[un]register_timer_hook due to a lack of upstream users and a belief
that there were no out-of-tree users. However, systemtap uses it and
with that patch applied, some stap scripts fail with
Frederic Weisbecker fweis...@gmail.com writes:
[...]
Sometimes I don't mind keeping around code in the kernel for out of
tree users, depending on the case. But in this specific matter we have
more standard ways to do this kind of hook: kprobes, static
tracepoints. A tracepoint on the timer
2013/4/3 Frank Ch. Eigler f...@redhat.com:
Frederic Weisbecker fweis...@gmail.com writes:
[...]
Sometimes I don't mind keeping around code in the kernel for out of
tree users, depending on the case. But in this specific matter we have
more standard ways to do this kind of hook: kprobes,
Hi -
On Wed, Apr 03, 2013 at 02:49:53PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
Sounds good, would you like to propose a version? We are also
interested in a timer tick event tracepoint for dynticks debugging.
How about this?
Author: Frank Ch. Eigler f...@redhat.com
Date: Wed Apr 3 10:35:21 2013
On 04/03/2013 07:44 AM, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
Hi -
On Wed, Apr 03, 2013 at 02:49:53PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
Sounds good, would you like to propose a version? We are also
interested in a timer tick event tracepoint for dynticks debugging.
How about this?
Author: Frank
23 matches
Mail list logo
