[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080919224109.GB4491@suse.de>
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2008 00:41:10 +0200
From: Olaf Dabrunz <od@...e.de>
To: Martin Bligh <mbligh@...gle.com>
Cc: Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <compudj@...stal.dyndns.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
"od Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: Unified tracing buffer
On 19-Sep-08, Martin Bligh wrote:
> >> Event ids are 16 bit, dynamically allocated.
> >
> > What are these (like)?
>
> u16
>
> Sorry, probably lots of implicit assumptions in there that I forgot to explain
Ids for event types. Either allocated dynamically, if the tracer needs
new ids on each use, or statically assigned for others (like my fctrace
or Steven's ftrace, I believe). Should we have a reserved range / registry
for static allocation, maybe something like a very simple version of
devices.txt?
> > Arch-specific "word"?
> > or some fixed-size-for-all-systems (so that trace buffers can be
> > shared/used on other systems?) Preferably the latter.
>
> Mmmm. I don't see anything wrong with making it just 8 byte aligned, personally.
> Steven - this was your thing?
Unaligned can be much slower. I guess some very quick tracers can
benefit from alignment.
> as long as we record it in the buffer header at trace start. I guess we should
> document the buffer header ;-)
Yes. :)
--
Olaf Dabrunz (od/odabrunz), SUSE Linux Products GmbH, Nürnberg
--
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