Hi Ben,
> > Or could we just move these tracepoints inside the
> > irq_enter()/irq_exit() area? (Seems not good for the timer_interrupt
> > case).
>
> I'd say just move them in. Anton, any objection ?
Sounds reasonable, no objections from me.
Anton
_
On Mon, 2012-09-10 at 10:02 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> I agree too. I'm a bit concerned about the lack of coverage the
> irq_enter() and irq_exit() have in the timer interrupt:
>
> may_hard_irq_enable();
>
> trace_timer_interrupt_entry(regs);
>
> __get_cpu_var(irq_stat).tim
On Mon, 2012-09-10 at 15:10 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-09-10 at 12:58 +0800, Li Zhong wrote:
> > There are a few tracepoints in the interrupt code path, which is before
> > irq_enter(), or after irq_exit(), like
> > trace_irq_entry()/trace_irq_exit() in do_IRQ(),
> > trace_
On Mon, 2012-09-10 at 12:58 +0800, Li Zhong wrote:
> There are a few tracepoints in the interrupt code path, which is before
> irq_enter(), or after irq_exit(), like
> trace_irq_entry()/trace_irq_exit() in do_IRQ(),
> trace_timer_interrupt_entry()/trace_timer_interrupt_exit() in
> timer_interrupt()
There are a few tracepoints in the interrupt code path, which is before
irq_enter(), or after irq_exit(), like
trace_irq_entry()/trace_irq_exit() in do_IRQ(),
trace_timer_interrupt_entry()/trace_timer_interrupt_exit() in
timer_interrupt().
If the interrupt is from idle(), and because tracepoint c
