[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20071214210709.GE9577@frankl.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2007 13:07:09 -0800
From: Stephane Eranian <eranian@....hp.com>
To: "Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net,
paulus@...ba.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, gregkh@...e.de,
mucci@...utk.edu, wcohen@...hat.com, robert.richter@....com,
andi@...stfloor.org, eranian@...il.com, roland@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [perfmon2] perfmon2 merge news
Charles,
On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 02:12:17PM -0500, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
>
> Stephane Eranian <eranian@....hp.com> writes:
>
> > [...] AFAIK, there is no single call to stop T1 and wait until it
> > is completely off the CPU, unless we go through the (internal)
> > ptrace interface.
>
> The utrace code supports this style of thread manipulation better
> than ptrace.
Afre you saying that utrace provides a utrace_thread_stop(tid) call
that returns only when the thread tid is off the CPU. And then there
is a utrace_thread_resume(tid) call. If that's the case then that is
what I need.
How are we with regards to utrace integration?
Thanks.
--
-Stephane
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists